Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="System Ufera" data-source="post: 6580935" data-attributes="member: 6671268">Ah, I got so caught up in the examples from the rest of that paragraph that I completely neglected to address the first sentence! When I say &quot;fine manipulation,&quot; I'm talking about things like fingers; basically, a collection of relatively thin, moderately-to-highly flexible digits, or a substitute which can perform the same tasks with comparable effectiveness, (telekinesis, perhaps?), and with bonus points if the parts are used primarily for the manipulation of the world around oneself, or otherwise if using the parts for manipulation would not interfere with their primary purpose (for example, if you manipulated things with your neck, and doing so prevented you from breathing, that would not be good).Well, I'm kind of already heeding the advice in the second half of what you said there. If I put in the work to define a concept mechanically, regardless of how good or bad the results of that work may be, it'll be wasted if the concept the mechanics apply to has no place or explanation in the setting of my game.That's why, for example, I probably won't design for my game a weapon consisting of a laser that is both powered and controlled by epic guitar solos - on its own, such a device would require a means of transforming awesomeness into usable energy, perhaps via some kind of biological reaction involving adrenaline, and I highly doubt that such a power source could produce enough energy, or do so promptly enough, for the laser to be useful. The other possibility would be divine magic, but that would just mean that the deity hears, and is pleased by, your music, and rewards you by zapping your enemies with the deity's own laser beams.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="System Ufera, post: 6580935, member: 6671268"] Ah, I got so caught up in the examples from the rest of that paragraph that I completely neglected to address the first sentence! When I say "fine manipulation," I'm talking about things like fingers; basically, a collection of relatively thin, moderately-to-highly flexible digits, or a substitute which can perform the same tasks with comparable effectiveness, (telekinesis, perhaps?), and with bonus points if the parts are used primarily for the manipulation of the world around oneself, or otherwise if using the parts for manipulation would not interfere with their primary purpose (for example, if you manipulated things with your neck, and doing so prevented you from breathing, that would not be good). Well, I'm kind of already heeding the advice in the second half of what you said there. If I put in the work to define a concept mechanically, regardless of how good or bad the results of that work may be, it'll be wasted if the concept the mechanics apply to has no place or explanation in the setting of my game. That's why, for example, I probably won't design for my game a weapon consisting of a laser that is both powered and controlled by epic guitar solos - on its own, such a device would require a means of transforming awesomeness into usable energy, perhaps via some kind of biological reaction involving adrenaline, and I highly doubt that such a power source could produce enough energy, or do so promptly enough, for the laser to be useful. The other possibility would be divine magic, but that would just mean that the deity hears, and is pleased by, your music, and rewards you by zapping your enemies with the deity's own laser beams. [/QUOTE]

Verification