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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Underman" data-source="post: 5995630" data-attributes="member: 6696705">Ideally ivory tower, my playstyle goal isn't to reconcile iii with i. The goal is to be in-character and focus on ii. To do iii, one would have to withdraw to author or director stance. To do iii and remain in actor stance would be difficult for me. And if I did withdraw from actor stance to do iii, choosing a narration like "weakening an ooze by mocking Juiblex" would shred any immersion left because I dislike it so much.i guess that for you, since you brought it up, those (houseruling the eldritch blast and houseruling bow rates of fire) are somehow analagous and worth contrasting.For someone interested in having D&D model historical assumptions about medieval bow rate of firing, they're probably more analogous but I'm not sure and I doubt its a concern for the average D&D player.For me, they're not analagous and so not worth comparing.Of course, this has to do with my expectations from the playstyle. Certain people may assume that my playstyle tries to have (here, definitions raises its ugly head) "simulationist" expectations of consistently and comprehensively modeling real-life stuff. That would be a misunderstanding as I've been trying to point out.I think it was for "the better" for 4E players who liked the system as is, and for "the worse" for everyone else who felt that leaving it up to houseruling didn't support their playstyle. But I'm stating the obvious.I don't know how to articulate it in a way that you could parse and accept, anymore than anybody else has already tried to do so on the last several pages of this thread or other threads. Or how to prove that Nagol et al have not been successful so far in this regard simply due to some sort of hole in their understanding.</blockquote>

Verification