I think I like exploring the best. Finding cool new things, discovering secrets, entering parts of the world my character has never seen. But then, my favorite role as a player in the party was "mapper" (back when we had roles like "caller," "treasurer," "mapper," etc.).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As a player, exploring, assuming a DM has set up a really interesting setting.
As a DM, combat, because as a DM I know how much work goes into creating a really challenging, yet doable, setting to do such exploration, and how the players usually just shrug, and move on. (see above).
I think its an interesting obversation that in a roleplaying game, two of the bigger voices on these forums don't value roleplaying as the primary focus. It's not a personal slight, it's an observation.
It's roleplaying. Combat is fun, but the meat and potatoes to me of what D&D is now is who the players invest in their characters to solve the problems. Exploration is fun, but how do those players get together and decide what and how to explore.
I think its an interesting obversation that in a roleplaying game, two of the bigger voices on these forums don't value roleplaying as the primary focus. It's not a personal slight, it's an observation.
It's roleplaying. Combat is fun, but the meat and potatoes to me of what D&D is now is who the players invest in their characters to solve the problems. Exploration is fun, but how do those players get together and decide what and how to explore.
Roleplaying is a natural extension of the game. It does not have to be forced and "chosen".
I was in a session last night where are party came upon a small city of 4-5000 being attacked by a Dragon and we could see a portion of the citizens were being enslaved. We jumped in and out of character for some 10 minutes trying to figure out how to deal with the situation. Though there was a clear path into the city that was laid out by the DM, one of the louder voices in the party (known as THAT GUY from a previous thread), wanted to go in another way. I finally gave up, muted my mic, and after another 5 minutes of haggling without me the party went with his plan. The DM then had to pause the game for about 7 or 8 minutes while he re-sorted the encounters, as he had not expected such an approach to the city.
I mentioned the old trope that D&D would be better without players. It got laughs all around
Oh, and prior to that, the in-game day before, THAT GUY wanted the party to go turn south (party was headed north to above city, been tracking the bad guys for days, and the tracks headed towards this small city), because he interpreted the birds all flying south as an omen that we should go south. The party was wavering until my Halfling spoke up and said "Birds fly away from trouble. We are looking for trouble. We should go north."
Finally, I will say this. The DM in question is using the traditional XP award system to level up. I have zero problems with this method. It is refreshing.
However, because of all the roleplay talk back and forth, we managed to each collect 500 XP in a five plus hour session (granted, maybe 4 was actual game time as there were various RL interruptions). My char went from 8835 XP to 9335 XP. The session before I collected about 600 XP. You want to do the calculations on how long it will take to level up at that rate, when the next level is 14,000, when there is a ton of RP?
I think its an interesting obversation that in a roleplaying game, two of the bigger voices on these forums don't value roleplaying as the primary focus.
I enjoy roleplaying.
However, I have been in purely RP games that have zero exploration or combat in them. They almost always turn into soap opera style stories where we are just RPing about what someone said to someone else last session. Not a fan.
Whenever I take the Bartle Test, I always come out SEA - Socializer first, Explorer second, Achiever third. This means I highly value RP, but I like RPing about the E and the A - the explorations I have done, or the goals my character has met, or toward which that character is working. Knowing that I was SEA, I tried, several times, playing on purely social (RP-only) MUSHes/MUXes. They did not engage me. I prefer to RP *about* something, than to have the RP be an "end" in and of itself.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think its an interesting obversation that in a roleplaying game, two of the bigger voices on these forums don't value roleplaying as the primary focus. It's not a personal slight, it's an observation.
It's roleplaying. Combat is fun, but the meat and potatoes to me of what D&D is now is who the players invest in their characters to solve the problems. Exploration is fun, but how do those players get together and decide what and how to explore.
Roleplaying is a natural extension of the game. It does not have to be forced and "chosen".
I was in a session last night where are party came upon a small city of 4-5000 being attacked by a Dragon and we could see a portion of the citizens were being enslaved. We jumped in and out of character for some 10 minutes trying to figure out how to deal with the situation. Though there was a clear path into the city that was laid out by the DM, one of the louder voices in the party (known as THAT GUY from a previous thread), wanted to go in another way. I finally gave up, muted my mic, and after another 5 minutes of haggling without me the party went with his plan. The DM then had to pause the game for about 7 or 8 minutes while he re-sorted the encounters, as he had not expected such an approach to the city.
I mentioned the old trope that D&D would be better without players. It got laughs all around
Oh, and prior to that, the in-game day before, THAT GUY wanted the party to go turn south (party was headed north to above city, been tracking the bad guys for days, and the tracks headed towards this small city), because he interpreted the birds all flying south as an omen that we should go south. The party was wavering until my Halfling spoke up and said "Birds fly away from trouble. We are looking for trouble. We should go north."
Finally, I will say this. The DM in question is using the traditional XP award system to level up. I have zero problems with this method. It is refreshing.
However, because of all the roleplay talk back and forth, we managed to each collect 500 XP in a five plus hour session (granted, maybe 4 was actual game time as there were various RL interruptions). My char went from 8835 XP to 9335 XP. The session before I collected about 600 XP. You want to do the calculations on how long it will take to level up at that rate, when the next level is 14,000, when there is a ton of RP?
So two points. One, the poll literally has it as a main option. It this specific thread, it's a choice outside of the other two. It's a specific call out. So the way I read the poll is "Which of these three elements do you like best, thinking about them without any input from the other two"
Second, Every single time you describe a game, it's always the negatives. Why the negativity?
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
Combat. The very heart of the game is combat. That's what most of the rules are written for. I love exploration, and as a DM I try to make going there and getting back again as much a part of the adventure as going into the ancient ruins and coming back out with the loot. You can roleplay your heart out during combat and exploration.
I see no need to "double down" on roleplaying. You're already doing that. Twice as much roleplaying doesn't make anything any better. You pretty much just abandon the dice, stop playing the game, and chat. With the way my players have always lost focus the moment they don't need their dice in hand, I don't want to deal with just roleplaying.
I like running travel campaigns. A mix of skill checks and choices that can help or harm the players. Mix in survival rule and then it becomes a challenge for the players. I think this falls under exploration.
Roleplaying > combat > exploration. That said, I always feel bad about answering “roleplaying” because even though it’s by far my favorite, it stinks on its own, and I can’t stand the beret-wearing wannabe writer sort of players who love to talk about how they love non-combat sessions. BioWizard’s post (#7) says it far better than I could.
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
Maybe edit the first post and make it clear that "roleplaying" should be "social interaction"?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
So read properly (which is how I guess I read it in the first place), this poll is kind of saying, what do you like RPing about the most? Combat, Exploration, or Social stuff? To which my answer remains: I like RPing about exploration the most. Provided, as Vince said, that it is a cool and interesting world or place to explore with lots of secrets, mysteries, ancient myths, etc, to uncover.
My answer would be entirely different in a game like Champions, which is usually played using a modern city in the real world -- for instance, we used New York, Chicago, and L.A. over the years. There's not really anything fun to explore in Chicago, from an RPG sense (although I'm sure it'd be fun as an actual tourist). There's no real "exploration" in Champions most of the time. But you usually do a lot more in-combat social RPing in Champions, than I generally see people doing in D&D, or than my group ever did (or currently does) in D&D.
I generally *don't* enjoy stuff like faction politics, palace intrigue, etc., as something to RP about, which is often what people mean when they say "social." Yuck. No.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As a player, my favorite way to roleplay is through combat. For example, my Changeling Hexblade Pact of the Blade Warlock's whole thing is being very mutable, not being held down by any race, gender, or form of combat. So, if Chance (my character's name) wants to appear as an elven hunter, they just use their Shapeshifting ability from being a Changeling to turn into a Wood Elf, and then use Pact of the Blade to summon a Longbow (using Improved Pact Weapon), with their Eldritch Blast appearing as an arrow. If Chance wants to appear as a shifty smuggler, they'll turn into a human with a few scars and dirty clothing, and summon a dagger as their pact weapon. If Chance wants to appear as a scholarly wizard, they'll turn into a High Elf and summon a Quarterstaff as their Pact Weapon. These are mostly combat-related features that help me roleplay my character and I have a great time doing it.
As a DM, my favorite to roleplay is through Exploration, but not so much of the landscape as exploration of the world. The players figuring out and building their story is what makes me have the most fun as a DM.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
Maybe edit the first post and make it clear that "roleplaying" should be "social interaction"?
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
No worries, I figured as much. Didn't mean it to come off as overly critical. Many of us have had the roleplaying argument before and we carry around a lot of baggage from it.
As a player, my favorite way to roleplay is through combat. For example, my Changeling Hexblade Pact of the Blade Warlock's whole thing is being very mutable, not being held down by any race, gender, or form of combat. So, if Chance (my character's name) wants to appear as an elven hunter, they just use their Shapeshifting ability from being a Changeling to turn into a Wood Elf, and then use Pact of the Blade to summon a Longbow (using Improved Pact Weapon), with their Eldritch Blast appearing as an arrow. If Chance wants to appear as a shifty smuggler, they'll turn into a human with a few scars and dirty clothing, and summon a dagger as their pact weapon. If Chance wants to appear as a scholarly wizard, they'll turn into a High Elf and summon a Quarterstaff as their Pact Weapon. These are mostly combat-related features that help me roleplay my character and I have a great time doing it.
I love this idea! I have always found it somewhat difficult to tie in my character's backstory into roleplay this well, especially in combat or any other situation that isn't explicitly "social interaction."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Which do you enjoy the most: Combat, Exploration, or Social Interaction?
I'm the Valar (leader and creator) of The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit/Anything Tolkien Cult!
Member of the Cult of Cats, High Elf of the Elven Guild, and Sauce Priest & Sauce Smith of the Supreme Court of Sauce.
If you want some casual roleplay/adventures in Middle Earth, check out The Wild's Edge Tavern, a LotR/Middle Earth tavern!
JOIN TIAMAT'S CONGA LINE!
Extended Sig
I think I like exploring the best. Finding cool new things, discovering secrets, entering parts of the world my character has never seen. But then, my favorite role as a player in the party was "mapper" (back when we had roles like "caller," "treasurer," "mapper," etc.).
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As a player, exploring, assuming a DM has set up a really interesting setting.
As a DM, combat, because as a DM I know how much work goes into creating a really challenging, yet doable, setting to do such exploration, and how the players usually just shrug, and move on. (see above).
I think its an interesting obversation that in a roleplaying game, two of the bigger voices on these forums don't value roleplaying as the primary focus. It's not a personal slight, it's an observation.
It's roleplaying. Combat is fun, but the meat and potatoes to me of what D&D is now is who the players invest in their characters to solve the problems. Exploration is fun, but how do those players get together and decide what and how to explore.
Wait, aren't all of them roleplaying? The third pillar is Social Interaction, right?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Roleplaying is a natural extension of the game. It does not have to be forced and "chosen".
I was in a session last night where are party came upon a small city of 4-5000 being attacked by a Dragon and we could see a portion of the citizens were being enslaved. We jumped in and out of character for some 10 minutes trying to figure out how to deal with the situation. Though there was a clear path into the city that was laid out by the DM, one of the louder voices in the party (known as THAT GUY from a previous thread), wanted to go in another way. I finally gave up, muted my mic, and after another 5 minutes of haggling without me the party went with his plan. The DM then had to pause the game for about 7 or 8 minutes while he re-sorted the encounters, as he had not expected such an approach to the city.
I mentioned the old trope that D&D would be better without players. It got laughs all around
Oh, and prior to that, the in-game day before, THAT GUY wanted the party to go turn south (party was headed north to above city, been tracking the bad guys for days, and the tracks headed towards this small city), because he interpreted the birds all flying south as an omen that we should go south. The party was wavering until my Halfling spoke up and said "Birds fly away from trouble. We are looking for trouble. We should go north."
Finally, I will say this. The DM in question is using the traditional XP award system to level up. I have zero problems with this method. It is refreshing.
However, because of all the roleplay talk back and forth, we managed to each collect 500 XP in a five plus hour session (granted, maybe 4 was actual game time as there were various RL interruptions). My char went from 8835 XP to 9335 XP. The session before I collected about 600 XP. You want to do the calculations on how long it will take to level up at that rate, when the next level is 14,000, when there is a ton of RP?
I enjoy roleplaying.
However, I have been in purely RP games that have zero exploration or combat in them. They almost always turn into soap opera style stories where we are just RPing about what someone said to someone else last session. Not a fan.
Whenever I take the Bartle Test, I always come out SEA - Socializer first, Explorer second, Achiever third. This means I highly value RP, but I like RPing about the E and the A - the explorations I have done, or the goals my character has met, or toward which that character is working. Knowing that I was SEA, I tried, several times, playing on purely social (RP-only) MUSHes/MUXes. They did not engage me. I prefer to RP *about* something, than to have the RP be an "end" in and of itself.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
So two points. One, the poll literally has it as a main option. It this specific thread, it's a choice outside of the other two. It's a specific call out. So the way I read the poll is "Which of these three elements do you like best, thinking about them without any input from the other two"
Second, Every single time you describe a game, it's always the negatives. Why the negativity?
This. The poll is wrong and poses a false premise. You can roleplay in combat or exploration, and you should be if you're not. Unless your game is super meta and you actually insert the players into the game as characters somehow, you are roleplaying the entire time.
The best combats answer dramatic questions and force players to make choices beyond just what would be the most optimal action for the current battlefield. Many of the most memorable roleplaying moments from my past games happened in combat.
Social interaction and exploration are a means to get to that dramatic peak. They both can have great reveals and fun surprises, but combat is where the stakes are highest and you literally put your life on the line for what you believe in. Seeing that as somehow apart from roleplaying is just completely wrong-headed.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Combat. The very heart of the game is combat. That's what most of the rules are written for. I love exploration, and as a DM I try to make going there and getting back again as much a part of the adventure as going into the ancient ruins and coming back out with the loot. You can roleplay your heart out during combat and exploration.
I see no need to "double down" on roleplaying. You're already doing that. Twice as much roleplaying doesn't make anything any better. You pretty much just abandon the dice, stop playing the game, and chat. With the way my players have always lost focus the moment they don't need their dice in hand, I don't want to deal with just roleplaying.
Have fun in your games.
<Insert clever signature here>
I like running travel campaigns. A mix of skill checks and choices that can help or harm the players. Mix in survival rule and then it becomes a challenge for the players. I think this falls under exploration.
Mostly nocturnal
help build a world here
Roleplaying > combat > exploration. That said, I always feel bad about answering “roleplaying” because even though it’s by far my favorite, it stinks on its own, and I can’t stand the beret-wearing wannabe writer sort of players who love to talk about how they love non-combat sessions. BioWizard’s post (#7) says it far better than I could.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I screwed up, it should have been combat, exploration, and social interaction. Unfortunately, I can't edit the poll.
I'm the Valar (leader and creator) of The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit/Anything Tolkien Cult!
Member of the Cult of Cats, High Elf of the Elven Guild, and Sauce Priest & Sauce Smith of the Supreme Court of Sauce.
If you want some casual roleplay/adventures in Middle Earth, check out The Wild's Edge Tavern, a LotR/Middle Earth tavern!
JOIN TIAMAT'S CONGA LINE!
Extended Sig
Maybe edit the first post and make it clear that "roleplaying" should be "social interaction"?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
So read properly (which is how I guess I read it in the first place), this poll is kind of saying, what do you like RPing about the most? Combat, Exploration, or Social stuff? To which my answer remains: I like RPing about exploration the most. Provided, as Vince said, that it is a cool and interesting world or place to explore with lots of secrets, mysteries, ancient myths, etc, to uncover.
My answer would be entirely different in a game like Champions, which is usually played using a modern city in the real world -- for instance, we used New York, Chicago, and L.A. over the years. There's not really anything fun to explore in Chicago, from an RPG sense (although I'm sure it'd be fun as an actual tourist). There's no real "exploration" in Champions most of the time. But you usually do a lot more in-combat social RPing in Champions, than I generally see people doing in D&D, or than my group ever did (or currently does) in D&D.
I generally *don't* enjoy stuff like faction politics, palace intrigue, etc., as something to RP about, which is often what people mean when they say "social." Yuck. No.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Combat is my favorite as a player. As a DM, exploration is my favorite. With that being said, I still love the social interactions.
As a player, my favorite way to roleplay is through combat. For example, my Changeling Hexblade Pact of the Blade Warlock's whole thing is being very mutable, not being held down by any race, gender, or form of combat. So, if Chance (my character's name) wants to appear as an elven hunter, they just use their Shapeshifting ability from being a Changeling to turn into a Wood Elf, and then use Pact of the Blade to summon a Longbow (using Improved Pact Weapon), with their Eldritch Blast appearing as an arrow. If Chance wants to appear as a shifty smuggler, they'll turn into a human with a few scars and dirty clothing, and summon a dagger as their pact weapon. If Chance wants to appear as a scholarly wizard, they'll turn into a High Elf and summon a Quarterstaff as their Pact Weapon. These are mostly combat-related features that help me roleplay my character and I have a great time doing it.
As a DM, my favorite to roleplay is through Exploration, but not so much of the landscape as exploration of the world. The players figuring out and building their story is what makes me have the most fun as a DM.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
On it.
I'm the Valar (leader and creator) of The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit/Anything Tolkien Cult!
Member of the Cult of Cats, High Elf of the Elven Guild, and Sauce Priest & Sauce Smith of the Supreme Court of Sauce.
If you want some casual roleplay/adventures in Middle Earth, check out The Wild's Edge Tavern, a LotR/Middle Earth tavern!
JOIN TIAMAT'S CONGA LINE!
Extended Sig
No worries, I figured as much. Didn't mean it to come off as overly critical. Many of us have had the roleplaying argument before and we carry around a lot of baggage from it.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I love this idea! I have always found it somewhat difficult to tie in my character's backstory into roleplay this well, especially in combat or any other situation that isn't explicitly "social interaction."