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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8630202" data-attributes="member: 7025508">The lack of subcategories on narrativism indicates that it is not of the same taxonomic rank than the two other baskets.First of, none of these are objective things. They're vague social constructs trying to classify other vague social constructs. And narrativism cares about character drama, which is a dramatic concern. Now narrativism amusingly doesn't care about the narrative, but that is merely one aspect of a story.That's very narrow definition of a story. Whether you feel consistency to 'internal cause'* is an important aspect of story is a matter of taste. There are surreal stories, there are stories that do not follow the usual narrative structures and patters, there are stories which have more emphasis on the character's feelings and experiences, that focuses getting under their skin. And all sorts of other concerns. And most of them have absolutely nothing in common with tech manuals.* Which itself is a term so vague that it is practically useless. That I don't agree with your preferred theoretical framework is not an insult. Preferably they should agree to respect both priorities and they easily can do this even if they would value these priorities at different degrees as they do not actually directly conflict. In this instance you have invented the GM effectively introducing an unannounced houserule, as D&D normally doesn't have damage penalties and this is causing the issue. Bob describes how his character grits his teeth and with the help of the adrenaline rush caused the injury swings his greatsword with one hand and the GM lets him do this as no damage penalties actually exist in the rules. BTW, the whole 'conflict' assumes that we have two people who have such singular priorities that they care about only this one thing. This in  my experience is unlikely. People who care about both of these thing in this example are far more common, so satisfying both priorities in this way is normal and welcome.</blockquote>

Verification