Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8474109" data-attributes="member: 16814">You've looked at the shove from the point of view that it has already happened while trying to argue the threat from the point of view that you can just decide it doesn't happen.&nbsp;&nbsp; I don't think it follows that we, as people, just get to always decide if we're threatened or not, and I don't think it follows that PCs do as well.&nbsp; There's are many effects in the game that impose the Frightened conditions, for instance, and many of those involve a threat of some kind (violence, overwhelming dread, etc).&nbsp; So, even in the game we're okay with our PCs being successfully threatened, at least in some cases.&nbsp; If we look, then, at both of these cases from the fact that there's a test of some kind to determine if the shove/threat is successful, then in both cases the player is constrained by this success in future action declarations.&nbsp; They are constrained from moving freely while prone, for instance, and, in the case of the actual Frightened condition, constrained in what they can do.&nbsp; Sure, a frightened character can think that their brave all they want, but they can't approach the source of their fear and have disadvantage while they can see that source.&nbsp; We we're going to say that this is not an indication of the PC's feelings, I feel we're badly unmoored from any form of inhabiting the shared fiction like the rest of the Roleplaying section says we should be.So, if we're okay with the same structure of test to impose effect that limits future action declarations in the case of a fear effect and a shove, then we're on very unstable ground to build a foundation that any other kind of threat is something that cannot impose any limitations.&nbsp; We need to move outside this argument to find a reason that a threat without a frightened condition rider is just up to the PC to decide.&nbsp; We cannot stand on these things (a shove and a threat) being so different that one is obviously a constraint while the other cannot be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8474109, member: 16814"] You've looked at the shove from the point of view that it has already happened while trying to argue the threat from the point of view that you can just decide it doesn't happen. I don't think it follows that we, as people, just get to always decide if we're threatened or not, and I don't think it follows that PCs do as well. There's are many effects in the game that impose the Frightened conditions, for instance, and many of those involve a threat of some kind (violence, overwhelming dread, etc). So, even in the game we're okay with our PCs being successfully threatened, at least in some cases. If we look, then, at both of these cases from the fact that there's a test of some kind to determine if the shove/threat is successful, then in both cases the player is constrained by this success in future action declarations. They are constrained from moving freely while prone, for instance, and, in the case of the actual Frightened condition, constrained in what they can do. Sure, a frightened character can think that their brave all they want, but they can't approach the source of their fear and have disadvantage while they can see that source. We we're going to say that this is not an indication of the PC's feelings, I feel we're badly unmoored from any form of inhabiting the shared fiction like the rest of the Roleplaying section says we should be. So, if we're okay with the same structure of test to impose effect that limits future action declarations in the case of a fear effect and a shove, then we're on very unstable ground to build a foundation that any other kind of threat is something that cannot impose any limitations. We need to move outside this argument to find a reason that a threat without a frightened condition rider is just up to the PC to decide. We cannot stand on these things (a shove and a threat) being so different that one is obviously a constraint while the other cannot be. [/QUOTE]

Verification