Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 8498308" data-attributes="member: 6787503">I'm speaking with reference to 5E only, and my post was meant to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, not &quot;an argument for how things should be&quot;. The part of your post that I've bolded sums up my thinking in posting this thread pretty well, though.And I agree with you that authorities in 5E are quite clear and that's all that really needs to be said about what the rules say on the subject. This argument has been recently explored in a few other threads however, and I didn't see a need to rehash it here. I was responding to a poster who raised the possibility that a group might comprehend the rules of 5E in such a way as to remove the player's authority over their PC's decision-making faculties under certain circumstances defined by that group, which, I agree with that poster, would be within the rules of the game for that group. The question I raised in the last paragraph of my post regarding what such a group stands to gain by implementing rules that posit such a conflict between the player and the PC is one about which I am genuinely curious. From what you've posted here, I might guess that you feel it would contribute to &quot;finding out who your character actually is when put under pressure in that way&quot; and whether &quot;your strength of character measures up.&quot; Is that about right?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 8498308, member: 6787503"] I'm speaking with reference to 5E only, and my post was meant to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, not "an argument for how things should be". The part of your post that I've bolded sums up my thinking in posting this thread pretty well, though. And I agree with you that authorities in 5E are quite clear and that's all that really needs to be said about what the rules say on the subject. This argument has been recently explored in a few other threads however, and I didn't see a need to rehash it here. I was responding to a poster who raised the possibility that a group might comprehend the rules of 5E in such a way as to remove the player's authority over their PC's decision-making faculties under certain circumstances defined by that group, which, I agree with that poster, would be within the rules of the game for that group. The question I raised in the last paragraph of my post regarding what such a group stands to gain by implementing rules that posit such a conflict between the player and the PC is one about which I am genuinely curious. From what you've posted here, I might guess that you feel it would contribute to "finding out who your character actually is when put under pressure in that way" and whether "your strength of character measures up." Is that about right? [/QUOTE]

Verification