NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8503185" data-attributes="member: 16814">This is a cubes issue, not a fiction issue.  There's no fiction attached to a loss of hitpoints -- any such provided is entirely fictional.  I'm not sure why you keep making the assertion that arbitrary fiction is meaningful as fiction.Is it?  The "feels fast" bit is vague and non-conclusive.  This can be used to describe a success or a failure with hidden consequences.  But let's skip past this and assume that the cube result of the check was a full success and so directs back to the fiction to indicate that there is a change from no attached grapple hook to an attached grapple hook.  This is a cloud to cubes to cloud situation.  The cloud was "I throw the hook" the cubes is the check and result and the resultant cloud is "the hook is attached."  Further, there are few reasonable ways that the cubes result feeds back into the cloud.  The fiction for a successful attempt to attach a grapple hook is pretty well constrained -- some details are open, but the thrust of the situation is not.  I can't really narrate this result in any appreciably different way.  Sure, you can attempt to insert uncertainty back into the cloud with use of things like "feels fast" but this isn't actually related to anything in the model process.Here, though, there's a huge break.  Your narration of the result of the check is entirely arbitrary.  There's a very wide leeway in how this event can be described, and they all generate widely different fiction.  As I've said, instead of describing the goblin as reeling and inches from death, it's 100% okay to describe the result as the goblin narrowly escaping a killing blow with a last moment sidestep.  This is a completely different fictional description.  Further, your narration above is extremely vague!  You describe the result only as the goblin "reeling and inches from death."  I could have used that description for the goblin from the start, because it doesn't actually have any real meaning.  So, in your example, you've not only provided entirely arbitrary description of the cubes result, but one that's also vague and doesn't provide any real change to the fiction.And I can prove that there's not change to the fiction because regardless of how I describe the loss of hitpoints, they do not constrain any future action declarations by anyone because of that fiction. The goblin being "reeling" doesn't mean it's at any penalty or restriction on it's next action. It's not actually "reeling" in that it's 100% fully functional and can, in the next moment, attack and then evade and run away easily -- something that an actually "reeling" person cannot do.  If you want to retain any narrative cohesion, in fact, you HAVE to immediately negate your narration by having the goblin recover instantly prior to doing whatever the goblin does next.  No, there's no required arrow from cubes to cloud here.  Insisting that you can create an arbitrary one that has no real value in the fiction doesn't mean it's so.  You spoke of modal evaluation of play above, but here you're insisting that this situation is required when it very clearly is not.  At best it's possible, but even then I think you're stretching things because the oft narrated fiction has no real value or impact.Long to short, you seem to confuse the ability to say something descriptive but without heft as equivalent in all respects to something that has heft, descriptive or not.  The grappling hook being attached has heft -- it's something I can leverage in play in future actions.  The goblin reeling has no heft -- I cannot leverage this reeling to do anything differently from before.</blockquote>

Verification