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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8303690" data-attributes="member: 71699">Ah, I am sorry to have given that impression. That is not it at all. I very much believe everyone works toward what they call skillful. However -<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">for technical reasons, I don't believe that they know for a demonstrable fact that what they call skillful is formally skillful</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I don't believe that what they exclude from what they call skillful, is necessarily not-skillful</li> </ol>To try to explain 1. With the Elo two players who have never met have a prediction as to which of them will win. With RPG, if we took a player from a group and put them in some random other group (I mean really random, chosen from among all groups on Earth) I don't think we will be in position to sync them up the same way: they might have been seen as skillful in their home group, and seem unskillful in this random group.Referring to charop, say the group they are dropped into are huge charop'ers, and their DM has shifted encounter difficulty to deal with this uber-munchkin-ness. They might flounder with their unoptimised characters and be felt by the group to be a low skill player. Of course they could over time accept what the group calls skill and adapt themselves to it...EDIT Also, I don't believe this poses a problem for the debate. We need only declare up front our mode of play (or whatever establishes what we are calling skillful) and then within the terms of that mode we can have a coherent discussion. Where we seeing fractious arguments is across modes. X is skillful! Oh no it isn't. Oh yes it is. Etc.</blockquote>

Verification