Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8436894" data-attributes="member: 7025508">This starts to remind me of alignment discussions, where alignment proponents bring in  their internalised assumptions and headcanons and claim that the two letters communicate all sort of information that simply isn't there in any objective sense. Gamey mechanical shorthands may speed up communication, and that might be valuable in certain instances; but that's it, they don't actually change how anything functions.[USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] 's example was to demonstrate that 4e limits GM fiat. I agree that the practice demonstrated in example would limit GM fiat, but that was not due the specific mechanics in question, it was due the extreme amount of transparency.On the contrary, that I am open about my opinions and preferences makes my engagement honest. It is ironic that you can't see this given the topic.I try my best to be objective, but then again, who of us can truly be that? But I really don't think the point has been close being made. It is perfectly possible that I am wrong, and 4e has robust anti-fiat elements, but just repeating names of 4e rule concepts like magical mantra is not going to demonstrate that.In any case, I think [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] and  [USER=3400]@billd91[/USER] were taking the discussion in more fruitful direction by outlining what is gained by limiting GM fiat, and on the other hand what sacrifices one needs to do to achieve that and why it might not necessarily be worth it.</blockquote>

Verification