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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8876934" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Here you did:Nope! My imagination works without pretzel-twisting.The rigid structure is for the players. The characters are not experiencing everything broken up into turns and rounds. The idea that the person who counters the counterspell is doing so after the fact is due to your insistence on viewing the actions as rigidly chronological. But you simply don't need to do that.If you prefer it, then by all means go ahead and treat it that way. But don't expect others to accept the limits you've chosen.What I was addressing was that Max said my imagination was wrong if I imagined the moon hitting the earth and then looked out the window to find that it had not happened. In other words, that for an imagination to be "right", its contents must be fact.Which is staggeringly off-base. It was an attempt at a counter point that pretty much reached critical mass, became a black hole, and sucked all logic into it. It made me have to lay down for a bit.My point was not in any way about any attempt at verisimilitude or whatever you're aiming at here.Who says? Clearly the rules do not say that. It's AN interpretation, not THE interpretation.Maybe it's not. Maybe the second counterspeller realized what the first was up to and was ready. Imagine for a moment that this was happening in a book or a movie instead of a game. No one would have a problem with it. Have you ever stood up in a movie theater and said "wait that wizard just went out of turn"? I mean... I have, but it was at "The Notebook" and I was on mushrooms, so in my case it made sense. But any other time, it'd be a silly thing to say.You and [USER=23751]@Maxperson[/USER] are applying the game structure to the fiction. Just don't do that for a moment and then there's any number of ways to say it would work as it plays.</blockquote>

Verification