Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8628386" data-attributes="member: 7026617">Sure.&nbsp; But there's a difference that's pretty stark between &quot;I have to absolutely be on my game or this is a fight we can lose&quot; and &quot;I can be expected to win if I don't screw up big time&quot;.&nbsp; See my comments in the prior post about PF1e and PF2e.There are some games its really hard to get around.&nbsp; Point build Disadvantage using systems are deliberately set up to force you toward engaging with character, and sometimes to make that work, you have to deal with where it comes from.&nbsp; And of course some genres pretty much demand it; its really, really hard to have a functional superhero who's a tabula rasa, unless them being a tabula rasa is part of the point in the character.Yeah, that was certainly true of the real old school Simulationists that were key to developing GDS (though in the day they'd call that IC or Deep IC Stance rather than anything to do with Actor).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8628386, member: 7026617"] Sure. But there's a difference that's pretty stark between "I have to absolutely be on my game or this is a fight we can lose" and "I can be expected to win if I don't screw up big time". See my comments in the prior post about PF1e and PF2e. There are some games its really hard to get around. Point build Disadvantage using systems are deliberately set up to force you toward engaging with character, and sometimes to make that work, you have to deal with where it comes from. And of course some genres pretty much demand it; its really, really hard to have a functional superhero who's a tabula rasa, unless them being a tabula rasa is part of the point in the character. Yeah, that was certainly true of the real old school Simulationists that were key to developing GDS (though in the day they'd call that IC or Deep IC Stance rather than anything to do with Actor). [/QUOTE]

Verification