| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:05 am Post subject: Re: What are Dark Side Points? |
 |
|
Thanks for fixing the quote.
| crmcneill wrote: |
On a related note, here is the list of traits from the Tales Of The Jedi Sourcebook: ...
...These are all some great suggestions, but with rolling 4D, you end up with a lot of possibles that may not match the scenario in which the Jedi gained his DSP. |
That's why rolling on a trait table doesn't work for me. It might help some players pick an existing or compatible aspect of their PC's personality to exagerate. But in that case, dividing it up isn't really necessary. Just let the player look at the list, see what they pick, maybe have a back and forth discussion, and the PC should end up with something that is consistent with character and story and that the player is willing and able to play.
| Quote: | | What I'm thinking is that that loss of innocence has the potential to make a person more vulnerable to the influence of the Dark Side, even if they never give in to it. |
It certainly could.
I could also see this going the other way. As Socrates famously said, the unexamined life is not worth living. Quite often the naively innocent have not examined their lives and don't have well formed POVs and philosophies that can help them make good decisions and weather a crisis of consience. Someone who has successfully confronted their dark side and learned from this may end up stronger afterwards.
| Quote: | | This, I think, would ultimately tie in to my Willpower vs. DSP concept, so for now its just theoretical, but I do think that a person who has experienced trauma or tragedy in their lives, like (for example) a combat veteran with PTSD, is more vulnerable to that aspect of themselves than someone who has never experienced the horrors of war. |
I do not in any way mean to discount your life experiences. However, while this certainly can be true as you have experienced, it is not universally true and I would be concerned that universally applying it would lead to a fatalistic and ultimately tragic tone to your game more in keeping with classic Call of Cthulhu rather than space opera. But it is your choice to set your campaign tone.
| Quote: | | Whether they need them or not, I would think even experienced players appreciate hints every now and then. I have done some stage acting in my time, and working from a script is always much easier than improvising something. Every good actor makes the part their own, thereby making their individual performance unique, but they will always appreciate having some sort of framework upon which they can flesh-out their character. IMO, roleplaying is the same way. In both cases, you are playing a roll, and it helps to have as much knowledge as you can get, especially when you are starting out. |
Hints may help and may be appreciated. But the vast majority of players I have GM'd for feel that it is their character, not the GMs. When one acts on stage, one is the actor, not the author nor the director. (This is generally true, but obviously not universally true. Personally all my experiences acting on stage or film have been solely as actor, with no authorical or directorial duties.) So the director (or author) providing help may be useful or even necessary.
An RPG is quite different. It is improvisational theater and the players are co-authors along with the GM. The GM may think he knows what will (or might) happen, but he can't control the choices or interactions of the players/PCs. What evolves in play is often something quite different than what the GM originally conceived.
Good players know their characters much better than the GM ever will or could and so the hints may be helpful or may not be. I think focusing on the process of how players and GMs reach a consensus on how play should evolve is more interesting and fruitful to enjoyable play than any series of tables could ever be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe it is a seduction score. How far along the character is towards being seduced/consumed by the Dark Side.
One strange thing I7ve noticed about those who get consumed by the Dark Side is that they don't seem to think clearly, twising everything into a situation where they are the victim. For instance, anakin and Padme near the end of Episode III.
The "it controls your actions" part of the Force probably shouldn7t be overlooked. Anakin is crying during the scene where he is killing younglings at the Jedi Temple.
Perhaps the loss of freedom expressed in losin the character to the GM is a closer mirror to what happens in the films that just a game mechanic. Much of the Sith behavior patten seems to be (pardon the pun) forced. The "join with me and together we can defeat my master" speech appears unavoidable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:50 pm Post subject: Re: What are Dark Side Points? |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | That's why rolling on a trait table doesn't work for me. It might help some players pick an existing or compatible aspect of their PC's personality to exagerate. But in that case, dividing it up isn't really necessary. Just let the player look at the list, see what they pick, maybe have a back and forth discussion, and the PC should end up with something that is consistent with character and story and that the player is willing and able to play. |
I think you and I have already gone round and round over the degree of control that a player should have over the bad things that happen to his character. I'm not saying I agree with you; I'm just not going to argue the point. Your proposal is certainly valid for a mature gaming group, but not all groups are so blessed.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | What I'm thinking is that that loss of innocence has the potential to make a person more vulnerable to the influence of the Dark Side, even if they never give in to it. |
It certainly could.
I could also see this going the other way. As Socrates famously said, the unexamined life is not worth living. Quite often the naively innocent have not examined their lives and don't have well formed POVs and philosophies that can help them make good decisions and weather a crisis of consience. Someone who has successfully confronted their dark side and learned from this may end up stronger afterwards. |
This is also true. As you said below, it is not universally true that all people will react to the same set of emotional stimuli / trauma in the same fashion, which is something that the RAW doesn't recognize. While I don't want to develop a hugely complex system, I would like to see some sort of recognition in the game of the real world fact that some people will succumb to emotional trauma while others are more resilient.
| Quote: | | I do not in any way mean to discount your life experiences. However, while this certainly can be true as you have experienced, it is not universally true and I would be concerned that universally applying it would lead to a fatalistic and ultimately tragic tone to your game more in keeping with classic Call of Cthulhu rather than space opera. But it is your choice to set your campaign tone. |
I'd like to keep my campaign tone close to the theme of the OT, a somewhat lighthearted microcosm of real life, where characters laugh, cry, get endangered, get out of danger, get hurt, but ultimately triumph at the end. My primary issue here is that the DSP RAW does not adequately reflect what I see on the screen with character's dealing with their emotional struggles, nor does it reflect the real life diversity of individual emotive reactions.
| Quote: | An RPG is quite different. It is improvisational theater and the players are co-authors along with the GM. The GM may think he knows what will (or might) happen, but he can't control the choices or interactions of the players/PCs. What evolves in play is often something quite different than what the GM originally conceived.
Good players know their characters much better than the GM ever will or could and so the hints may be helpful or may not be. I think focusing on the process of how players and GMs reach a consensus on how play should evolve is more interesting and fruitful to enjoyable play than any series of tables could ever be. |
Well said. Ideally, I'd like to come up with a system that recognizes that aspect of roleplaying but at the same time takes a more detailed and diverse approach to morality in the SWU than the RAW currently features. I still think dice rolls should be a factor, in that a player shouldn't have carte blanche to say what his character does and does not experience emotionally. It's not so much that the player shouldn't have a say, but that the character should have a say too, as defined by dice rolls.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:09 pm Post subject: Re: What are Dark Side Points? |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | While I don't want to develop a hugely complex system, I would like to see some sort of recognition in the game of the real world fact that some people will succumb to emotional trauma while others are more resilient. |
The rules do recognize this. It's why it is a role playing game not a roll playing game. The rules just don't provide a mechanic to enforce a reaction. A mechanic is what you seem to be looking for. Good luck with that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | One strange thing I7ve noticed about those who get consumed by the Dark Side is that they don't seem to think clearly, twising everything into a situation where they are the victim. For instance, anakin and Padme near the end of Episode III. |
Anakin seems to be trying to justify his actions to himself and others up until the very end of Episode III. I suspect most bad people don't think of themselves as evil, more that they are victims, they were forced to take action. or that their victims deserve their fate. Certainly that could in part be the Dark Side warping their perception.
| Quote: | | The "it controls your actions" part of the Force probably shouldn7t be overlooked. Anakin is crying during the scene where he is killing younglings at the Jedi Temple. |
I assume he has turned at this point. I have a difficult time rationalizing his actions within the game system otherwise since murdering a bunch of children should be a bunch of DSPs and his eyes go all evil yellow. After all, this isn't like slaughering an entire Tusken village of nameless men, women, and children. Some of these younglings have names (Jeswi Ele and Shia Letap) well at least tentatively have names. http://answers.wikia.com/wiki/What_were_the_names_of_the_younglings_that_were_killed_by_Anakin_Skywalker 
| Quote: | | Perhaps the loss of freedom expressed in losin the character to the GM is a closer mirror to what happens in the films that just a game mechanic. Much of the Sith behavior patten seems to be (pardon the pun) forced. The "join with me and together we can defeat my master" speech appears unavoidable. |
Agree. I think those conversations are easier to script as a GM. As a player running the Dark Sider, I think I would talk less and act more.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | Anakin seems to be trying to justify his actions to himself and others up until the very end of Episode III. I suspect most bad people don't think of themselves as evil, more that they are victims, they were forced to take action. or that their victims deserve their fate. Certainly that could in part be the Dark Side warping their perception. |
Not just Anakin. Palaptine was doing the same thing when the jedi came to arrest him. While I think some of this might be a guilt thing, I also believe that it partly a way to tap into the dark side. As the character needs to draw upon anger, fear, and aggression, he needs to fell wronged in order to draw strength from the Force. If everyone was warm and sympathetic it would probably make it harder.
But, I also think that some o this is the "will of the dark side of the force" in action. Anakin certainly didn't turn on Padme by choice. More of a running out o control situation.
| Quote: | | I assume he has turned at this point. I have a difficult time rationalizing his actions within the game system otherwise since murdering a bunch of children should be a bunch of DSPs and his eyes go all evil yellow. After all, this isn't like slaughtering an entire Tusken village of nameless men, women, and children. Some of these younglings have names (Jeswi Ele and Shia Letap) well at least tentatively have names. http://answers.wikia.com/wiki/What_were_the_names_of_the_younglings_that_were_killed_by_Anakin_Skywalker |
I assume so, too. The way I read it, Anakin turns when he bows dow to Palpatine. Stopping Windu wasn't evil, misguided perhaps, certainly he was acting for the wrong reasons, but he wasn't being evil. It was when he decided to join with Palaptine that he turned.
I think the storming of the temple and killing the younglings was a task assigned to ensure that Anakin couldn't atone. If Anakin had ran to Padme right after the incident with Windu, she might have convinced him to tell the Jedi what happened and Anakin probably would have repented/atoned. That is, assuming that he wasn't killed during Order 66. THe slaughter helped to keep Anakin on the dark path.
In game terms, I'm not certain just how many DSPs the event would be worth, even if Anakin hadn't turned. I think multiple atrocities probably lump together at some point. Otherwise the DSP totals would be much higher for the bad guys. The destruction of AAlderaan would be worth a DSP fortune on a strictly linear scale. Probably only 2 or 3 for the temple incident.
| Quote: | | Agree. I think those conversations are easier to script as a GM. As a player running the Dark Sider, I think I would talk less and act more. |
Well, it seems that dark side characters are lonely. The all seem to want a confidant/ally, and are extremely jealous and worried about their ally having any other friends.
One of the ironies of the "rule of two" is that the Sith need for trechery is so great that they all seem to break it. Dooku tries to recruit Obi-Wan, and does recurit Ventress. Palatine is working on Anakin before he even recruits Dooku. Anakin tries to recruit Padme and later Luke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | ...I also believe that it partly a way to tap into the dark side. As the character needs to draw upon anger, fear, and aggression, he needs to fell wronged in order to draw strength from the Force. If everyone was warm and sympathetic it would probably make it harder. |
Excellent insight.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Agree. I think those conversations are easier to script as a GM. As a player running the Dark Sider, I think I would talk less and act more. |
Well, it seems that dark side characters are lonely. The all seem to want a confidant/ally, and are extremely jealous and worried about their ally having any other friends.
One of the ironies of the "rule of two" is that the Sith need for trechery is so great that they all seem to break it. Dooku tries to recruit Obi-Wan, and does recurit Ventress. Palatine is working on Anakin before he even recruits Dooku. Anakin tries to recruit Padme and later Luke. |
Really good insights and analysis that is also helpful in giving villains a motivation to befriend and persuade/seduce a PC rather than just kill them outright. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | I've always felt that Dark Side Points acted as lodestones on a person's moral compas so the more Dark Side Points they get the more likely they are to employ questionable methods .
I hadn't thought about it in any great depth before but I do like the ideas proposed that Dark Side Points add or amplify negative traits to the character but I really like that idea. |
BUT without using any heavy handness, or house rulings (will of the force etc) how would you actually push that "Lodestone" on their moral compass?
| Quote: |
The rules do recognize this. It's why it is a role playing game not a roll playing game. The rules just don't provide a mechanic to enforce a reaction. A mechanic is what you seem to be looking for. Good luck with that. |
It may indeed be a role playing versus ROll playing game, but you can't enforce what there is no mechanic for..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | BUT without using any heavy handness, or house rulings (will of the force etc) how would you actually push that "Lodestone" on their moral compass? |
I haven't had to in the past as the only folks I've seen getting a Dark Side point have either already been following a dark path or have been aware of the full scope of the Dark Side and played it out without needing GM assistance.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | BUT without using any heavy handness, or house rulings (will of the force etc) how would you actually push that "Lodestone" on their moral compass?
| Quote: | | The rules do recognize this. It's why it is a role playing game not a roll playing game. The rules just don't provide a mechanic to enforce a reaction. A mechanic is what you seem to be looking for. Good luck with that. |
It may indeed be a role playing versus ROll playing game, but you can't enforce what there is no mechanic for.. |
True.
That's why I asked towards the beginning of this thread.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Just so there is not confusion, are you looking at what you do with your character or something the GM does to the player's character? |
|
If the former you don't need a mechanic. If the latter, that's not a direction I want to move in, but if you did I would suggest looking to Pendragon traits and passions as a way of simulating character actions that aren't within the control of the player.
For example: as the character succumbs to the Dark Side the player would pit their Dark Side Passion (whatever one calls it e.g. Will of the Dark Side, Lure of the Dark Side, DSP number, Seduction of the Dark Side) against an opposing trait or passion such as Love Padme, Loyalty to Jedi Code, or even Willpower to see what the character does. Or one could just use the Dark Side point total as a bonus to a Vengeful, Lustful, Greedy type trait to see if the character succumbs to his baser instincts.
Note: If you have never played Pendragon, you should. It is well worth it and far and away the best rules to simulate Arthurian style fantasy and works very well for any heroid/tragic romance or fantasy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Bren wrote: |
The rules do recognize this. It's why it is a role playing game not a roll playing game. The rules just don't provide a mechanic to enforce a reaction. A mechanic is what you seem to be looking for. Good luck with that. |
It may indeed be a role playing versus ROll playing game, but you can't enforce what there is no mechanic for.. |
Exactly. If this were strictly a roleplaying game, there would be no need for dice or difficulty numbers, and everything would be decided by friendly discussion between the GM and the players. We use the dice to determine the random factors that no one should have direct control over. I believe you mentioned earlier that stories take unexpected turns that neither the GM nor the players planned for, so I don't see why a character's mental and emotional state should be exempt from this process. Wasn't it John Lennon who said "Life is what happens while you're making other plans"? A player may want to have his character follow a certain path, but that is no guarantee that that is what will happen.
| Bren wrote: | | If the former you don't need a mechanic. If the latter, that's not a direction I want to move in, but if you did I would suggest looking to Pendragon traits and passions as a way of simulating character actions that aren't within the control of the player. |
I wouldn't mind looking at the Pendragon system for notes, but ideally, I'd like a system that used existing skills and could be applied to the D6 system as is without major modifications to all the official character templates.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | gharkal wrote: | | It may indeed be a role playing versus ROll playing game, but you can't enforce what there is no mechanic for.. |
Exactly. If this were strictly a roleplaying game, there would be no need for dice or difficulty numbers, and everything would be decided by friendly discussion between the GM and the players. |
Two points:
1) As I have said, I think ad nauseum, this is a false dichotomy. Many others have said they don't need a mechanic to get interesting, dramatic player choices. The obvious reductio ad absurdum of your position is to roll dice for every PC decision. No one on this forum is advocating either never rolling dice or rolling for all decisions.
2) There are dice less RPGs. I haven't ever played one, but they do exist. Google, Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game.
| Quote: | | We use the dice to determine the random factors that no one should have direct control over. |
But clearly we don't agree on which factors should be random. Personality, in my real life experience is not really one of them. Dramatically (and in RPGs) I prefer less PC personality randomness not more.
| Quote: | | Bren wrote: | | If the former you don't need a mechanic. If the latter, that's not a direction I want to move in, but if you did I would suggest looking to Pendragon traits and passions as a way of simulating character actions that aren't within the control of the player. |
I wouldn't mind looking at the Pendragon system for notes, but ideally, I'd like a system that used existing skills and could be applied to the D6 system as is without major modifications to all the official character templates. |
So what you are looking for is a system that
(1) Provides a game mechanic that controls PC behavior in critical dramatic situations based on a random die roll rather than allowing the player to control PC's behavior.
(2) Doesn't require any new skills, traits, or abilities to simulate or facilitate that critical dramatic control.
(3) Doesn't cause significant modification to the official character template.
Again. Good luck with that. And though I may sound flip, I am not. My 40 years of wargamming and roleplaying suggests to me that you are chasing El Dorado, the Fountain of Youth, Lost Atlantis, etc. You might google "Project Management Triangle" and read up on then look at the image http://technomarketer.typepad.com/technomarketer//Project_Triangle.gif and make the following substitutions (1) = QUALITY; (2) = COST; and (3) = TIME.
TANSTAAFL There is always a trade off between desired result (Quality), effort to get the result (Cost), and change required (Time).
If you succeed in your quest, we will be impressed. But I'm not going into the jungle with you.
Last edited by Bren on Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:04 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 1) As I have said, I think ad nauseum, this is a false dichotomy. Many others have said they don't need a mechanic to get interesting, dramatic player choices. The obvious reductio ad absurdum of your position is to roll dice for every PC decision. No one on this forum is advocating either never rolling dice or rolling for all decisions. |
That there are, but there are also many who flat out ignore those aspects, unless there is some sort of mechanic (such as alignment shifting, therefore lose a level, in adnd) to MAKE them use those.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16406
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | 1) As I have said, I think ad nauseum, this is a false dichotomy. Many others have said they don't need a mechanic to get interesting, dramatic player choices. The obvious reductio ad absurdum of your position is to roll dice for every PC decision. No one on this forum is advocating either never rolling dice or rolling for all decisions. |
It would only be reductio ad absurdum if I was, in fact, planning to convert every player action into a dice roll, which I am not. What I have maintained from the beginning is that the negative consequences of a player's actions should not be the result of a discussion and compromise between the player and the GM. They get to make their own choices, but they should not be overly involved in selecting the consequences because of the potential for bias.
Right now we play a Roleplaying game that includes the rolling of dice. I'm not interested in getting rid of the Roleing; I just think that it would be more realistic if certain situations featured a little more rolling.
| Quote: | | 2) There are dice less RPGs. I haven't ever played one, but they do exist. Google, Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game. |
Not interested, but thanks. I think the randomness of the dice roll is an essential component for representing the randomness of things beyond the character's control, in the same way that they would be beyond our control if they happened to us in real life.
| Quote: | | But clearly we don't agree on which factors should be random. Personality, in my real life experience is not really one of them. Dramatically (and in RPGs) I prefer less PC personality randomness not more. |
So how would you do it? Make all players pick one of the four basic personality types for their character? As you said below, I am not being flippant either; I'm genuinely curious.
| Bren wrote: | So what you are looking for is a system that
(1) Provides a game mechanic that controls PC behavior in critical dramatic situations based on a random die roll rather than allowing the player to control PC's behavior. |
In all honesty, I'd prefer something that would be flexible enough to go either way, in that it would allow the GM to crack the whip on an immature player, or that it could be used as a guideline for a mature player to have a better understanding of what a specific character might behave in certain situations, and then rewards them with CPs for roleplaying in character.
| Quote: | (2) Doesn't require any new skills, traits, or abilities to simulate or facilitate that critical dramatic control.
(3) Doesn't cause significant modification to the official character template. |
That's why I keep leaning towards Willpower; it's the only skill that is designed from the ground up to measure the degree to which a character has control over himself.
| Quote: | | If you succeed in your quest, we will be impressed. But I'm not going into the jungle with you. |
I never said it would be easy, just that I think there is a place for it, and I know I'm not the only one.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | It would only be reductio ad absurdum if I was, in fact, planning to convert every player action into a dice roll... |
No. Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: "reduction to the absurd") is a form of argument in which a proposition is disproven by following its implications logically to an absurd consequence e.g. you ask "well then why roll any dice at all" to disprove my position and I in turn say "why not roll dice to make all decisions" to disprove your position. Typically it is considered a logical fallacy. I was not using it to disprove anything. Merely observing that it applies equally to both our positions.
Good luck with your quest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
