|
Leperflesh posted:I don't know that system, but I am familiar with Modiphius' 2d20 system (as applied in Conan) which uses range bands like this. The answers in Conan are that the scene has Zones of variable, slightly vague size, and if you need to you can just tell players what zone their characters are in. That lets you answer these questions with yes or no, without having to lay out a map with actual specific distances. That's a different matter, though - what I called "conceptual range", where you can say everyone on the floor is Close to each other but people on the gantry are Far from them. That can be ok. But AW is more like FFG Star Wars - it describes its range bands by actual distance, although it gives descriptions rather than numbers - and that causes all kinds of confusion. quote:But I'll just add that it seems like these people are desperately trying to play a tactical combat RPG that takes place on a grid, despite a system intended to abstract from that somewhat and thereby streamline combat. They are rejecting the "theater of the mind" approach to a combat and trying to use careful foot-by-foot positioning and abilities to gain tactical advantage. They might benefit from sitting down and watching an Actual Play of the game, that shows how combat is supposed to work with examples, if they just can't accept that this game doesn't know or care whether you are exactly five feet or exactly ten feet away from a particular enemy. There is a component of that, but it's not a particular attachment to tactical combat systems but rather consequences. First of all, there's the visualisation issue. I mean, when I read that one of the CFA players was a regular D&D 5e player normally I cringed inwardly for fear that in the first few minutes he might ask how wide the town square was or something. Because there's no right answer. I can try to make up a number, but then the floodgates are open for everything to have an exact measurement. If I hedge or evade the question, the idea of a simulated and defined fiction world instantly shatters, because I have just admitted that the world has no defined distances and it's literally impossible for our brains to visualise the look or interactions in a world like that. The only hope is for it to be just "not mentioned", which is what most Actual Plays do. Secondly, there's the tendency for ToTM to produce combat scenes that are either nonsense or boring. This is what happened with Feng Shui. When our group played Feng Shui 1e years back when it came out, we had a blast. When we recently tried Feng Shui 2e, it was boring as heck. Why? Because when we played Feng Shui 1e we'd just come off playing AD&D 2e where basic melee was just rolling to hit. When we played Feng Shui 2e we'd since played D&D 3e, 4e, 13th Age, Pathfinder 2e Playtest, and others that don't have that problem, and Feng Shui just felt like another version of "just rolling to hit" except the players are expected to make up random stuff to make it interesting instead of the game doing that.
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
hyphz posted:If I hedge or evade the question, the idea of a simulated and defined fiction world instantly shatters, because I have just admitted that the world has no defined distances and it's literally impossible for our brains to visualise the look or interactions in a world like that. I think I found one of the problems you and/or your group has.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:You throw the grenade, it goes off, and everyone within hand to hand range of where it exploded takes damage. So "area" just tells you it hits multiple targets, and "hand to hand" tells you the size of the zone(s) that are hit by that area damage. Makes sense to me. hyphz posted:If I hedge or evade the question, the idea of a simulated and defined fiction world instantly shatters, because I have just admitted that the world has no defined distances and it's literally impossible for our brains to visualise the look or interactions in a world like that. No, it absolutely does not. Exactly how big was the throne room in Return of the Jedi, where Luke fights Vader and the Emperor? How many feet across was the chamber at the beginning of Raiders of the Lost Ark, when Indy is trying to put a sack of sand onto the pedastal of the idol? Exactly how many dwarves were on the walls at the Battle of the Five Armies? Failing to have exact numbers for unimportant distances and measures does not "instantly shatter" the simulated and defined fiction world, because it's totally OK if different players have marginally different mental images. In fact them not having a totally consistent imaginary concept of a fictional world is inevitable, even if you try to give perfect distances and measures for every detail asked. When the GM tells me in D&D that it's an empty 10' by 10' room, and nobody at the table asks exactly what the color and texture and material of the walls is, how much dust is present, whether the limewash on the ceiling is fresh or peeling, whether there's cobwebs in the corner or if it's recently swept... there's an infinite number of details that you could ask for, but never did, and the players definitely did not simultaneously imagine exactly the same details. We're all maybe imagining something, but it's not the same. And that's just for an empty room! When I describe the king's barge as "opulent and gilded, as long as a jousting field and draped with bunting, festooned with flags and crowded with revelers" that's hopefully an engaging and interesting description, but there's absolutely no way that the players all imagined exactly or even approximately the same thing! Who cares! What's important is conveyed. This is how all fiction works and also how shared fiction works too. In a game where exact distances aren't important, there's no need to provide them, and the fact that players won't imagine precisely the same is not just not a problem, it's expected and understood in all shared fiction. e. hell. Even in the real world, non-fiction, we all exist in separate realities that are not perfectly contiguous, because perception and memory are flawed. Witnesses to a murder all describe the perpetrator differently. Ask five people who just went for a long walk together exactly how far they walked, without looking at their GPS devices or referring to a map, and you'll get five approximate and reasonable but not identical answers. People simply do not need perfectly accurate referents in order to understand and visualize a reality, and interpsersonal inconsistency is just part of the human experience. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
hyphz posted:That's a different matter, though - what I called "conceptual range", where you can say everyone on the floor is Close to each other but people on the gantry are Far from them. That can be ok. But AW is more like FFG Star Wars - it describes its range bands by actual distance, although it gives descriptions rather than numbers - and that causes all kinds of confusion. Intimate (constraint, a range): she can bring it to bear only when she's very close to her target or subject, close enough to hold, kiss or grapple him. Arm's reach isn't close enough. Hand (constraint, a range): she can bring it to bear only when she’s within arm’s reach of her target or subject. Close (constraint, a range): she can bring it to bear only when she’s pretty close to her target or subject. If they could call to one another and have a shouted conversation, they’re close enough. Far (constraint, a range): she can bring it to bear only when she’s pretty far from her target or subject. If she can see the whites of his eyes, they’re too close together. "all kinds of confusion". I mean, okay, grenades that you carry (as opposed to a dedicated/underbarrel launcher) are a weird beast in this, being conceptually ranged maybe in between guns and swords, but also the only thing that really lives there. But also, grenades that you carry are only available as something for the gunlugger to take instead of a melee weapon that a slightly less crazed murderer would carry. Your melee weapon is grenades. Do you hurt yourself with them? Not as a matter of course, no, any more than the battlebabe who takes a staff-based melee weapon (1-harm hand area) is constantly smacking themselves in the nose like Daffy Duck. But, you know, when you take harm and hit the harm move, the MC's going to narrate some of the extra unpredictable consequences as being because you used grenades as a melee weapon and didn't care, because you're using grenades as a melee weapon and you don't care.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 21:27
|
|
|
Thanks Glazius. I can shout to someone who is in the next trench over from me, and I can throw a grenade into that trench and not be caught in the blast. "Shouting distance" depending on indoors/outdoors and competing noise could be much further than anyone can actually throw a grenade, and I would hope that the rules don't require everyone within Close range to be hit if a grenade goes off. I'm sure in a dramatic-narration game where there's no detailed grid combat rules, the GM and the players can create the scene such that the grenade usage makes sense, including "I heroically throw myself on the enemy's grenade" as a (cliche'd a bit) sacrifice, "I hurl the grenade into the group of enemies over there" as totally viable, and "holy poo poo, where did Brick get a hand grenade?" as a hilarious moment in a fight scene that isn't contradicted by the rules.  In this scene, the players do not attack the GM on the basis that he refuses to give exactly how many yards away the rival newscasters are so they can calculate the ideal placement for Brick. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
90s Cringe Rock posted:Do these groups overlap, or are they all from the same larger group? Specifically, I really want to know if you recruit all your players from the same geographic area, or same webforum, or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 22:06
|
|
|
...same ward...
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Was there an actual answer to whether this group is mostly neurotypical or not? I didn't see an answer to that and it came up right when there was some more bickering, and really would explain these parsing errors where folks consistently are reading statements and walking away with completely different takeaways, or fixating on details the other interlocutor found unimportant. I think it was a valid question, that or if English is not a primary language (and I'm pretty sure we've established English is hyphz's original/primary language). Though I could see a British person who isn't used to say baseball fanatics (where the term was originally shortened from) and how rabidly active they are/were when the word entered the vernacular having that mix up in the other thread. Once again, not trying to be rude here or presumptive enough to say "Oh? You like elfgame different than me? Must be your brain doesn't work like mine" just it could explain how say 20 people can all read statements and walk away with similar enough interpretations, but then consistently trip up another person and then in explanations and dialogue later points never are quite grasped, to the point that hyphz is accused of bad faith or trolling. Coolness Averted fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
Yeah, the Ulillillia story comes to mind where he describes the exact amount of force required to get his dogs apart when they're loving. It's a doubly absurd detail: it has zero descriptive power and he has no basis at all for taking a measurement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:Was there an actual answer to whether this group is mostly neurotypical or not? I didn't see an answer to that and it came up right when there was some more bickering, and really would explain these parsing errors where folks consistently are reading statements and walking away with completely different takeaways, or fixating on details the other interlocutor found unimportant. For the record, this is a deeply personal question to ask of someone, and given the long long record of SA including posters who weaponize personal info, I legit don't think Hyphz should answer this, at least not openly in a thread. Just remember that people like zak s are known to haunt SA threads and use them against others, and while that's a worst-case scenario, the echoes of helldump and grogs.txt are still bouncing around in some places here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2020 23:56
|
|
|
Glazius posted:I mean, okay, grenades that you carry (as opposed to a dedicated/underbarrel launcher) are a weird beast in this, being conceptually ranged maybe in between guns and swords, but also the only thing that really lives there. But also, grenades that you carry are only available as something for the gunlugger to take instead of a melee weapon that a slightly less crazed murderer would carry. Your melee weapon is grenades. Do you hurt yourself with them? Not as a matter of course, no, any more than the battlebabe who takes a staff-based melee weapon (1-harm hand area) is constantly smacking themselves in the nose like Daffy Duck. But, you know, when you take harm and hit the harm move, the MC's going to narrate some of the extra unpredictable consequences as being because you used grenades as a melee weapon and didn't care, because you're using grenades as a melee weapon and you don't care. I'd disagree with this. Having grenades be Hand range is kind of weird, but I think it's meant to be that you can't hurl a grenade as far as you can shoot someone with a pistol. Gunluggers are the only ones who can pick them off a list to start with, but they aren't that rare - in the Gear and Crap chapter they're in the list of weapons that are incredibly common and cost just 1 Barter. So the Gunlugger is using them like most people use grenades.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:For the record, this is a deeply personal question to ask of someone, and given the long long record of SA including posters who weaponize personal info, I legit don't think Hyphz should answer this, at least not openly in a thread. Just remember that people like zak s are known to haunt SA threads and use them against others, and while that's a worst-case scenario, the echoes of helldump and grogs.txt are still bouncing around in some places here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
Once again, Hyphz, I told you exactly how to overcome the problem you said you had, and you ignored 90% of the post and restated the problem with different phrasing. Why do you do that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:09
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Exactly how big was the throne room in Return of the Jedi, where Luke fights Vader and the Emperor? You don't need measurements in those cases, because you can see it. Measurements are the closest you can get by speaking. Not knowing the exact measurement and being OK with that is totally different to being told that there is no measurement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Warthur posted:Please, please, please answer this question, hyphz. I have never heard of this either and I have gamed in several different scenes in the UK. It was my regular group, and another set of people I talked to but didn't play with in a local wargaming club (which would explain it)
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:Once again, Hyphz, I told you exactly how to overcome the problem you said you had, and you ignored 90% of the post and restated the problem with different phrasing. Why do you do that? Because the method isn't one I could apply, and I can see exactly how it would go wrong. Elector_Nerdlingen posted:You failed to address the rest of my post. It was important. This isn't some hypothetical theorycrafting gotcha, it's how you play Apocalypse World. It was: What are the characters doing? "We are looking around with our eyes." quote:They don't get to (or need to) ask for endless specific details in an attempt to figure out what the information you're hiding from them is, because you don't get to hide information from them because the game doesn't ever hinge on whether something was 3 or 2.5 feet away and they're gonna fail if they didn't know that, because the game doesn't work like that. "So you can't tell us what we see in this game? Maybe we don't need it, ok, but.. so you can't?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Because the method isn't one I could apply, and I can see exactly how it would go wrong. Yes, the other 90% of that post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:27
|
|
|
hyphz posted:"So you can't tell us what we see in this game? Maybe we don't need it, ok, but.. so you can't?" You tell them what they see, but you don't have to give them exact measurements and it'd be ridiculous if they insist you do so otherwise they can't have their characters act.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Thanks Glazius. I can shout to someone who is in the next trench over from me, and I can throw a grenade into that trench and not be caught in the blast. "Shouting distance" depending on indoors/outdoors and competing noise could be much further than anyone can actually throw a grenade, and I would hope that the rules don't require everyone within Close range to be hit if a grenade goes off. I'm sure in a dramatic-narration game where there's no detailed grid combat rules, the GM and the players can create the scene such that the grenade usage makes sense, including "I heroically throw myself on the enemy's grenade" as a (cliche'd a bit) sacrifice, "I hurl the grenade into the group of enemies over there" as totally viable, and "holy poo poo, where did Brick get a hand grenade?" as a hilarious moment in a fight scene that isn't contradicted by the rules. To be clear again, grenades are (4-harm hand area reload messy). So when you're trench warfaring at Close range, you can't use exclusively grenades to engage in a firefight. You can't use grenades to make a sudden threat of violence to force somebody in the next trench over into a bad reaction. You can't say you just lob a grenade into the next trench to catch them unprepared, the way you might if you had a grenade launcher they didn't know about. You might still be able to act under fire to do that last one. Oh, right, the other tags. Area (mechanical, constraint): its target or subject is an area, not a person; it fully affects everyone and everything there. An area weapon used against a larger gang inflicts its full harm, provided that the gang is crowded into the area in question. (It doesn't say much about the size of the area, only that you can ignore a gang's virtual armor based on size if you can get them all in the area. A grenade launcher is close but it doesn't e.g. simultaneously blow up everyone who could hear you shouting.) Reload (constraint): using it once means that the character has to take specific action to reload or reset it before she can use it again. (So if for example you're using grenades as melee weapons like a brain genius, you can't immediately follow up on any survivors without some time and safety to prime them, such as you won't find in a pitched melee.) Messy (cue): [I]t might hit every person in its area but might miss any given person in its area; and it leaves a mess behind—cosmetic property damage, blood and gore, barf or poo poo or other bodily produce, or some other kind of mess as appropriate. (So, yes, it might come down to it that you realize unless you dive on the grenade you get away clean and Plover dies.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 02:09
|
|
|
hyphz posted:"So you can't tell us what we see in this game? Maybe we don't need it, ok, but.. so you can't?" "I won't. I'm not going to tell you if it's 2.5 or 3 feet across, because it doesn't matter, and you're being a pain in the rear end about it. You want to go over there and measure it, or do you want to engage with the fiction? You know, like role-playing?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 02:45
|
|
|
You can say it's swerving between exactly 6 feet 2 and 37/64ths of an inch across and 4 feet 7 and 86/128ths of an inch across, with a height differential of +/- 8 and 30/32nds inches, and the rules interaction for trying to leap across it is exactly the same as if you'd described it as being real fucken gnarly but close enough to try jumping.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 02:53
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:Yes, the other 90% of that post. Well, ok, yes, I can acknowledge it might work that way, but the thing is that the players are by no means guaranteed to accept if I refuse to tell them how big something is, and they might simply start an argument that ruins the game, and responding to a move doesn't help because it would require me to make up too much stuff too quickly for me to be reliably confident in doing it, and whether or not running the game requires me to be reliably confident about it doesn't matter because getting anyone to play does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Well, ok, yes, I can acknowledge it might work that way, but the thing is that the players are by no means guaranteed to accept if I refuse to tell them how big something is, and they might simply start an argument that ruins the game, and responding to a move doesn't help because it would require me to make up too much stuff too quickly for me to be reliably confident in doing it, and whether or not running the game requires me to be reliably confident about it doesn't matter because getting anyone to play does. You are forbidden from concealing relevant information from your players. Why are you insisting that you must conceal relevant information from your players? There's no "might' here. There's a game that works if you play it rather than insisting that you can't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 02:56
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:You are forbidden from concealing relevant information from your players. Why are you insisting that you must conceal relevant information from your players? I insist that I can’t because I can’t be creative quickly enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Well, ok, yes, I can acknowledge it might work that way, but the thing is that the players are by no means guaranteed to accept if I refuse to tell them how big something is, and they might simply start an argument that ruins the game, and responding to a move doesn't help because it would require me to make up too much stuff too quickly for me to be reliably confident in doing it, and whether or not running the game requires me to be reliably confident about it doesn't matter because getting anyone to play does. The only way to get better at being reliably confident in making up stuff quickly is by doing it more. You can even tell your players that you're not great and trying to get better. If they're decent human beings, they'll understand and even might help you out! If they don't, and they ruin your game, then they're assholes and you shouldn't play with them anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:06
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Well, ok, yes, I can acknowledge it might work that way, but the thing is that the players are by no means guaranteed to accept if I refuse to tell them how big something is, and they might simply start an argument that ruins the game, and responding to a move doesn't help because it would require me to make up too much stuff too quickly for me to be reliably confident in doing it, and whether or not running the game requires me to be reliably confident about it doesn't matter because getting anyone to play does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I insist that I can’t because I can’t be creative quickly enough. You're real loving fast at making up reasons why a game you've never read and are too scared to run is actually impossible to play. Apply that same energy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:11
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:You're real loving fast at making up reasons why a game you've never read and are too scared to run is actually impossible to play. I have only meant that it is impossible for me, obviously there are people playing it. And the reason is because I’m too scared to run (and in the case of AW not particularly interested anyway) and I am asking why others are not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
I'd kinda be intellectually interested in how you and your groups would handle a GMless Apocalypse-ish game like Ironsworn or something. I'm thinking it might be an illuminating experience for either yourself, the group, or both. It'd be interesting to see if these people keep insisting on hyper specific measurements and their necessity when they have to share some of the responsibility for running things themselves Nemesis Of Moles fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Apr 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:23
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I have only meant that it is impossible for me, obviously there are people playing it. And the reason is because I’m too scared to run (and in the case of AW not particularly interested anyway) and I am asking why others are not. Maybe it's impossible for you because instead of trying to understand it you're looking for the first opportunity to go "Aha! See! Impossible!" As evidenced by the way you keep on insisting that you're going to hide relevant information from the characters when you've been told two or three times now that you are not allowed to do that. You keep on coming back to "well if I don't tell them how big..." or how far or whatever, but you're not allowed to do that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Well, ok, yes, I can acknowledge it might work that way, but the thing is that the players are by no means guaranteed to accept if I refuse to tell them how big something is, and they might simply start an argument that ruins the game, and responding to a move doesn't help because it would require me to make up too much stuff too quickly for me to be reliably confident in doing it, and whether or not running the game requires me to be reliably confident about it doesn't matter because getting anyone to play does. If a player says "I want to jump on top of the car Dog Head is driving, is it close enough for me to do so?" and you say "Yeah, but both him and the car you're on top of are going real fast so it'll be dangerous if you miss. Do you still want to make the jump?" then you have given them the information they need to proceed with the game. If they start holding it up because they want to know how many inches the cars are away from each other, then tell them that's not important.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
One goofy way to capture the drama of the "Luke, use the Force" bullseye moment in a traditional roll-your-skills-to-see-if-you-succeed system is to make sure every character has a secret "Use the Force" skill rating known only to the GM, and have all force use rolls happen behind the GM screen. Then you never really know if it's helping or if you're just getting lucky, and trusting some weird old man that no, you have great force sensitivity, honest, just try it, is a real risk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:42
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:As evidenced by the way you keep on insisting that you're going to hide relevant information from the characters when you've been told two or three times now that you are not allowed to do that. You keep on coming back to "well if I don't tell them how big..." or how far or whatever, but you're not allowed to do that. Hang on, so I do have to have exact measures for everything because if the players ask I can’t not tell them? Like, you’re saying I should ask them why they want to know, but that’s ultimately a way of not telling them the measurement, and now I have to do that because I can’t hide that information?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:49
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Hang on, so I do have to have exact measures for everything because if the players ask I can’t not tell them? Like, you’re saying I should ask them why they want to know, but that’s ultimately a way of not telling them the measurement, and now I have to do that because I can’t hide that information? I already told you this, more than once, and I'm not typing it again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Hang on, so I do have to have exact measures for everything because if the players ask I can’t not tell them? Like, you’re saying I should ask them why they want to know, but that’s ultimately a way of not telling them the measurement, and now I have to do that because I can’t hide that information? When every poster who's engaged is telling you that exact distances don't matter, how can you even ask this in good faith?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Hang on, so I do have to have exact measures for everything because if the players ask I can’t not tell them? Like, you’re saying I should ask them why they want to know, but that’s ultimately a way of not telling them the measurement, and now I have to do that because I can’t hide that information? 1) No, you don't. The secret is that the exact measurements don't actually matter 99% of the time and you can just go "it's close enough that you can probably run over and hit him with your bat before he shoots you". 2) If someone asks you something you didn't think about that you realize is actually important, there's no shame in going, for example, "sorry, I didn't think about how big this junkyard is before now. Does twice the size of Bob's back yard sound about right?". You don't need every important detail decided on ahead of time. You just need to be willing to stand by what you decide on, and some times that means asking your players for their thoughts or taking a quick break to decide. EDIT: And before you say "but what if they really want to know the exact distance", part of the social contract is believing the other group members if they say something isn't important and if they keep pushing for them when you say it isn't important they're kind of being an rear end in a top hat. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Apr 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
Zorak of Michigan posted:When every poster who's engaged is telling you that exact distances don't matter, how can you even ask this in good faith? I was ok with that until... quote:You keep on coming back to "well if I don't tell them how big..." or how far or whatever, but you're not allowed to do that. Nerdlington just claimed that I am not allowed to not tell them how big something is. So if I am asked how many feet the gap is, and I tell then that they can make the jump to it, then I am not allowed to do that because I did not tell them the information they actually wanted which is how many feet it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 04:05
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I was ok with that until... You have had this explained multiple times now, try reading any of those posts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:You have had this explained multiple times now, try reading any of those posts. quote:They don't get to (or need to) ask for endless specific details in an attempt to figure out what the information you're hiding from them is, because you don't get to hide information from them because the game doesn't ever hinge on whether something was 3 or 2.5 feet away and they're gonna fail if they didn't know that, because the game doesn't work like that. But the distance something is away isn’t “hidden”, assuming there is no fog and the apocalypse didn’t collapse space, there is a measurable distance there. It doesn’t matter if the system doesn’t use it or it doesn’t matter, in an existing world it is there. If I am asked and I instead redirect to another question or avoid the issue, then I am either hiding that information (which apparently I am not allowed to do) or admitting I don’t know it which means the world is incomplete. The fact it doesn’t matter to the system makes the question less likely to come up, but it doesn’t save anything if it does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
The rest of the post you keep re-quoting that one part of tells you how to deal with this specific thing, Hyphz. As does another one of my posts on this page, as well as at least two more posts from others on this page.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2020 04:18
|
|