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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jackelope King" data-source="post: 3826926" data-attributes="member: 31454">And why does that logic not apply to per-encounter resources?I don't think so.  For example:Now, given what pemerton was responding to, what are A and B in this context?  I discuss players choosing to use resources, so the choice involved must be A.  Presumably, then, A represents the non-use of a resource.Now, as B is proposed as the cause of A, what do I claim is the causing players to avoid using that resource?   Because they percieve that they may be at greater risk at a later time without the less plentiful ("more expensive") resource.Pemerton therefore argues that the conclusion (it follows that if they don't have to worry about being at greater risk at a later time, then they don't worry about minimizing their resource expenditure and only do whatever reduces an opponent as quickly as possible) is only true if there is no other mitigating factor.Clear and sensible, right?Also a repetition of a previous poster (emphasis unchanged):If I know that I have a significant chance of losing in any given encounter, and no other factor presents itself, I would be an idiot not to use my best abilities to defeat that encounter. I am not forced to use them. I am merely encouraged to use them. If I know that the everage encounter includes a significant chance of losing, and no other factor presents itself, I would be an idiot not to ensure that I have my best abilities available to defeat that encounter. I am not forced to have them. I am merely encouraged to have them.Any idea who that poster was?And, having made the same point many times in the past, do you honestly think that this (or any other) conversation would be well served by pedantically inserting every caveat into every post?  I am already accused of making my responses too long.So, no, I don't think these side trips are worthwhile.</blockquote>You're caught between denying the antecedent and contradicting yourself. You have already said,So you would be an idiot for using a per-encounter resource if you had a more powerful per-day one, but you'd also be an idiot to use a resource if it had a high associated cost? Ouch. One heck of a catch-22.So you also agree that in a system with conditions which have a mechanical impact upon the ability of an afflicted party to interact positively with the mechanics of the game world, then an encounter does not need to be as binary as win / lose, where "losing" for the average group means "death", as you have implied in the past?[/QUOTE]

Verification