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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6845595" data-attributes="member: 16814">You're arguing a distinction without a difference.  It's your rule that does the work. It's your rule that ensures that the player with the most to gain/lose has the only say in the matter.  I assume that since the thwartee is granted the narrative power there's not restriction that he use it in any way?  He can, without discussion, just declare that the thwarter fails in his attempt and the thwartee completes his action as desired?  If so, that's because of your ruling, even if you've delegated power, and it's still your responsibility.  And it clearly disincentivizes and potentially negates an entire class of action declarations (thwarting ones).  Hiding behind the player that your ruling puts the onus on to claim that you don't do this seems... I don't know, because I don't understand why someone would make that kind of an argument.  Perhaps we just really do think very differently on these things, but, for me, even if I put a decision into another player's hands (which I do do, on occasion), I still maintain the final authority which means I still maintain the final responsibility, even if I never use it.  I could not ever argue that I wasn't responsible for denying another player a fair resolution of an action declaration just because I told another player to make the call.  Look, I answered it in two ways -- the first as if I decided that it didn't rise to the level of something I thought needed to be dealt with and the second if I did.  I even stated that the high probability would be that I would rule the first way  in any given situation.  But I said that, if I thought it warranted based on a host of other things, including past interactions, that I may choose the second path.  But here we are again with you posing the same question I answered but demanding that I must pick one of the two ways as my final answer.  I'm not allowed to have a nuanced position, I must declare a side (sides you picked, not me).  I tell you that I cannot with the information presented because, as I've already explained, I would base my choice on additional information not provided by your very abbreviated example.  You say that I'm being evasive because I haven't answered only a or b, only this or that, when my answers have been clear and consistent that I will not due to lack of information.So, you're posed with a choice.  You either take me at my word or you decided that I, for some strange and nefarious reason, are being intentionally dishonest by providing a nuanced answer instead of the false dichotomy you present.  My answer, either way, is as complete as I can make it given the information you've provided.</blockquote>

Verification