Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 4499799" data-attributes="member: 172">Lying? That's a pretty stern accusation. Please stop with assumptions of malfeasance; accusations of lying is a good way to escalate hostility in an already heated discussion.Let's examine what you did say...Emphasis added. I never objected to the idea that "figuring things out, going places, killing monsters, and/or taking their stuff" is par for the course for a D&D game. I did say that alone insufficient for me. You said, right there, that anything else is extraneous. I'm at a loss at how else to interpret your position.I'm not going to sit here and repeat previous posts. I've already shown one way in which an instrument skill could be important to the political game, and I've already stated I don't see anything wrong in coming up with tasks to accommodate players in what they are interested in doing; applying unflattering labels to it is not going to change my position.I don't run all my games at high levels, and not all my PCs turn every campaign into an economic feasability study... thank goodness. I know plenty of players do, but I stand against that playstyle.Are your PCs always in civilization where they can get what they want, whenever they want, with no time constraints? If so, I think you are missing out on some good gaming. Earlier you said that games are about solving problems. Survival scenarios are a staple in gaming and one of the quintessential problem solving scenarios. It's all well and good that you could order 100 silver arrows back in Waterdeep, but here, now it could be if you don't come up with some silvered weapons, the werewolf (or worse beastie) is going to take down the town.If skill points are nothing, then why do object to players allocating them to activities they are interested in having the capability to do.Skill points aren't "nothing". They are the same resource that let you notice danger, avoid being spotted, and know important facts about creatures you are facing.Then we really have no more basis for communication. Nothing I say is going to convince you.I've addressed this earlier, but to repeat: my practical experience with seafaring games shows this to be false.Your right I have something that handles sailor correctly: the profession sailor skill.As was mentioned earlier by another poster (the Gneech?), profession is meant to cover tasks that don't fall under other skills. A seafaring game might call on you to climb a mast or balance on a deck. But how about securing sails or performing damage control? That's not in the existing skill set.I said "if". Feel free to say "no, that's not what I meant". But calling me a liar is not conducive to a reasoned discussion and invites escalating tensions.No, not to my satisfaction, you cannot.Yes there is. But you've chosen to label positive player usage, using resources they have paid for with their skill points, as "just wants to break the game". Tarred, feathered, dismissed.As to sentence 1, not far out of your way, and it's worth it's weight in gold in making characters unique and significant. For #2, my experience differs; player will actively find ways to use skills with little or no DM intervention.This is a rephrase of an argument from the last post; my reply hasn't changed: this is inadequate because it fails to models potentially very different competencies.No, you don't need those skills. As already discussed, the lack of character distinction would make these solutions inadequate for me.So what am I getting here? I'm wrong for wanting something different out of gaming than you? You don't get to dictate what I want out of gaming; it doesn't work that way.</blockquote>

Verification