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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 9767621" data-attributes="member: 7027139">Upon further thinking, I imagine this would be best implemented as a fighter or monk subclass, and make it an opt-in mechanic.I don't really want to expand the list of available actions at once, but have distinct "modes" with different strengths and weaknesses the character can be in -- to avoid decision paralysis. If you only have 3 options at a time, but can switch between such sets it's easier to keep everything in mind.It can be flavored as weapons breaking, or the weapon magically transforming, or character switching stances.I'm not super interested in discussing them problems of philosophy, like "what does it really mean" to play a game, but from purely practical perspective: it's possible for someone to employ or hone just wrong skill because they are playing some self-imposed imaginary version of the game that doesn't actually exist.[SPOILER="Rant"]It can be acutely observed in fighting games: novices tend to be obsessed with executing combos, and special moves, and look! I landed a shoryuken! It's very hard to execute! (in SSF2T, at least)Sometimes such players play in a group only with each other, honing their long combos. Some of them might be considered a really good player in their circle! But then such player goes to a tournament and inevitably gets destroyed by someone who can't do all those flashy moves.It's inevitable because his group wasn't playing Street Fighter, they were playing "who can execute the biggest flashiest combo", and those are two different things -- you can be as skillful as you want at maintaining combos, it doesn't matter if you can't land the first hit.Some such players have a wake up call and realize he wasn't playing the game as it exists, learn the fundamentals and get good at the game. Others start complaining that it's unfair, and that his opponent is playing cheap. "Yeah she won, but I'm still the better player, because she was just spamming the same move! That takes no skill!"If you are bad at the game, you should lose -- because otherwise there's no difference between being good and being bad, and where's the fun in that?[/SPOILER]But this all is navel-gazing anyways: I'm not calling the shots at Wizards. They might need to onboard players and not scare them off, I don't, I already have players that I can count on to grit their teeth through growing pains and learn how to play.</blockquote>

Verification