Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8474297" data-attributes="member: 71699">It hinges on how a group grasps game mechanics in forming exceptions to players deciding. So far it seems that those arguing as you do, must say that there are game mechanics that are exceptions, and there are other kinds of mechanics that are not exceptions. The social skills fall into the latter category. But there is no robust, non-arbitrary test for what belongs in each category.I thought about whether one could say that it comes down to whether the thing covered by the mechanic must be something a player cannot decide their character does. For example, in relation to shove, a player can't decide their character moves 5' when it is not their turn. One problem with that view is that there are cases when a thing is both covered by a mechanic and also something that a player could decide that their character does, such as feel frightened. Another is that a character can move out of turn, if a game mechanic permits or forces it, including if the player does and if the player does not want their character to so move. We end up searching for a boundary where none exists, or establishing the boundary on the basis of arbitrary assertions we make about what is allowed.Alas, but the Supreme Torturer rolled well and the character broke. Who knew that they would do that in the very first hour of torment? But so it went.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8474297, member: 71699"] It hinges on how a group grasps game mechanics in forming exceptions to players deciding. So far it seems that those arguing as you do, must say that there are game mechanics that are exceptions, and there are other kinds of mechanics that are not exceptions. The social skills fall into the latter category. But there is no robust, non-arbitrary test for what belongs in each category. I thought about whether one could say that it comes down to whether the thing covered by the mechanic must be something a player cannot decide their character does. For example, in relation to shove, a player can't decide their character moves 5' when it is not their turn. One problem with that view is that there are cases when a thing is both covered by a mechanic and also something that a player could decide that their character does, such as feel frightened. Another is that a character can move out of turn, if a game mechanic permits or forces it, including if the player does and if the player does not want their character to so move. We end up searching for a boundary where none exists, or establishing the boundary on the basis of arbitrary assertions we make about what is allowed. Alas, but the Supreme Torturer rolled well and the character broke. Who knew that they would do that in the very first hour of torment? But so it went. [/QUOTE]

Verification