Powerful mage and game rules, [Topic spllit by Baronius] Options

[Baronius]

I understand what he's saying. I was surprised by it too, the first time I fought him. You're expecting a powerful mage, not a physical powerhouse, and yet none of your fighters can deal any serious damage.

I have never understood this type of approach. Why can't a powerful mage have very powerful "physical" resistances via her powerful magic and knowledge? Should every wizard be protected by 9 golems so no one can reach her? Because without resistances, wizards could be killed very easily, considering their low natural hit points and physical defense.

[Baronius]

Actually, don't underestimate how useful keeping strictly to the rules can be in helping creativity - by giving you a strict set of constraints to work in, it forces you to be a lot more creative and thoughtful within those constraints.

There is no such thing as forcing to be creative. Creativity is an ability, talent. You either have it or not have it (in particular fields). (What you describe can help to find witty solutions in a restricted environment -- just like engineers in a resource-critical environment, but it is not about "creativity".)

[DavidW]

Actually, don't underestimate how useful keeping strictly to the rules can be in helping creativity - by giving you a strict set of constraints to work in, it forces you to be a lot more creative and thoughtful within those constraints.

There is no such thing as forcing to be creative. Creativity is an ability, talent. You either have it or not have it (in particular fields). (What you describe can help to find witty solutions in a restricted environment -- just like engineers in a resource-critical environment, but not it is not about "creativity".)

I think this might be a terminology issue - what I describe would count as creativity as I understand the term, but I don't think this is a substantive disagreement.

[Jarno Mikkola]

The last few years of experience have convinced me that at least 95% of people who whine about the rules aren't actually concerned with the rules (nor do they really know much about the rules); they are mostly players with inadequate tactical skills who want to find some other pretext or explanation for their tactical failures during the game (I'm not referring to any one in particular).

Or it could be that, because you think that it's hard to implement things with the original rules, you have to come up with new artificial once and not tell it to the player, and then blaim them off not having tactical ability, when they don't know all the rules...

Artificial rules like, making a creature 99% immune to attack damage, just because it's weak otherwise.
Immunity auras... etc.

Actually, don't underestimate how useful keeping strictly to the rules can be in helping creativity - by giving you a strict set of constraints to work in, it forces you to be a lot more creative and thoughtful within those constraints.

There is no such thing as forcing to be creative. Creativity is an ability, talent. You either have it or not have it (in particular fields). (What you describe can help to find witty solutions in a restricted environment -- just like engineers in a resource-critical environment, but not it is not about "creativity".)

I think this might be a terminology issue - what I describe would count as creativity as I understand the term, but I don't think this is a substantive disagreement.

Well, no inventions were ever made without the need for it... and yes, that's the spirit of "creativity".