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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7189736" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Well, it's possible that the mechanics are being considered, yes. But is that really what's being considered?Let's run with the Orc/gerbil comparison. Why are their stat blocks different? (I suppose we'll have to pretend that gerbils actually have statblocks for this, but let's try....or if we must, let's use a mouse statblock reskinned to be a gerbil). Are the stats different for some mechanical game purpose? I would say perhaps that's an outcome, but not the goal of the stats being different. The stats are different because we have an idea of what an orc is and what it's capable of, and the same for the gerbil. The mechanics are designed around these ideas. I think this is the main contention of this whole tangent....the mechanics don't exist first and then ideas get added to them, it's the other way around. Here's an orc, how can we represent that in game mechanics. It's not "here's a low level threat that may be dangerous in numbers, hey let's assign the orc to these stats!"So any narrative decision I make is not about the mechanics, but instead is about the ideas that the mechanics represent. That's the commonality I mentioned. Other factors such as story needs and simple DM desire can easily override any such logic. So while it's easy to follow such logic and say "ah you're letting the mechanics dictate the outcome" I don't really think that's the case. Some might see this as a semantic quibble, but I think it's a pretty significant distinction.</blockquote>

Verification