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="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 4711971" data-attributes="member: 32536">Kamikaze, I think this discussion has already hit the point where it doesn't quite seem like we are speaking the same language anymore. I don't think I can persuade you, and I don't think you can persuade me. I really don't want to get any further into this "level of abstraction" discussion, since I simply don't want to argue definitions with you.However, there is one fundamental point of difference that I should point out.In my mind, the entire point of the roles system is to allow different classes of the same role to replace another. Sure, a Rogue is very different from a Warlock, but a team of characters works just as well with either. A Warlord and a Cleric are very different, but a team works just as well with either. What is more, it makes sense how they are interchangeable, and it is never forced.In your "role" system, all you are doing is trying to force totally different ideas to be equivalent. You try to claim that the difference between a sailor navigating the open seas and a guy skilled at disarming traps are equivalent to the difference between a rogue and a warlock, but you are simply wrong. Rogues and warlocks get their powers from different sources and use different methods, but ultimately they both do the exact same thing: deal large amounts of damage to a target in battle. This similarity is not an abstraction, it is a logical result of their actions. The similarity between navigating the seas and opening locks is an abstraction, since it only makes sense within the conceptual framework you devised and doesn't make sense on its own merits. Basically, these two situations are only equivalent if we presuppose the existence and validity of your "roles", which I am not going to do.The thing is, I can easily imagine that different kinds of challenges would have different "roles" that can be fulfilled in different ways. I can imagine that sailing would be its own challenge that has a captain role, a navigator role, and so on. One captain may run the ship using authority and respect. Another captain may run the entire ship using a psionic mind-link network to create a ship hivemind. One navigator may plot the ships course using specialized instruments and knowledge of the sun, moon, and stars. Another navigator may chart a path by calling upon the guidance of spirits and animals. These are true non-combat roles and classes, and you could even construct them using existing power sources without any trouble. However, I don't accept that there are global non-combat roles and classes that work independently of individual challenges. Such things only make sense within individual frameworks like "sailing a ship", which are equivalent to "combat" in level of detail.Huh, I guess I ended up trying to continue the argument after all... Sorry about that. Debating is a bad habit that is hard to break. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification