Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 5911869" data-attributes="member: 386">That's a reasonable point of view.My point of view is that we already call for an attack roll, and that can resolve whether or not the attack works.If you limit potential actions by creating a list, players must consult the list before they attempt anything.&nbsp; In AD&amp;D this was &quot;I can't climb, I'm not a thief&quot;; in 3E this was &quot;Do you have the feat for that?&quot;; and in 4E it was &quot;Do you have a power for that?&quot;Not that there's anything wrong with that.&nbsp; But it means that the way players make choices is going to be different.So we ask: what do players do in this game?&nbsp; Do they pick from a list of possible actions and execute the rules that relate to that action, or do they come up with an action on their own and apply the general action resolution rules to resolve it?I prefer the latter because I think it draws on one of the strengths of RPGs - so-called &quot;tactical infinity&quot;.&nbsp; (You don't really have infinite options because you're limited by what's plausible in the setting, but you get the point.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LostSoul, post: 5911869, member: 386"] That's a reasonable point of view. My point of view is that we already call for an attack roll, and that can resolve whether or not the attack works. If you limit potential actions by creating a list, players must consult the list before they attempt anything. In AD&D this was "I can't climb, I'm not a thief"; in 3E this was "Do you have the feat for that?"; and in 4E it was "Do you have a power for that?" Not that there's anything wrong with that. But it means that the way players make choices is going to be different. So we ask: what do players do in this game? Do they pick from a list of possible actions and execute the rules that relate to that action, or do they come up with an action on their own and apply the general action resolution rules to resolve it? I [i]prefer[/i] the latter because I think it draws on one of the strengths of RPGs - so-called "tactical infinity". (You don't really have infinite options because you're limited by what's plausible in the setting, but you get the point.) [/QUOTE]

Verification