Fair enough.
As would I were someone to hit nobility on the random chart; I've had to do just this a few times in the past.
But note that the 5e example still has the noble status being determined at char-gen along with the background, rather than dropped into play on the fly. It's the dropped-into-play-on-the-fly bit I have problems with, in that a) chances are it's being done just to gain an advantage in the here and now, and b) as the PC has thus always been a noble who knows how much previous play would have to be looked askance at - or worse, outright retconned - had this information been available all along.
Sure, a lot of this may happen at character generation. This may apply to many games, and 5E as presented does expect for a background to be selected when the character is created. But, there's no reason you can't let's say allow a player to delay the choice and then select his background at some point during play. This would allow for our spontaneous noble example. Or some other twist depending on how it's deployed. The advantage of this method is that the DM would perhaps be at least somewhat prepared because he'd be expecting a choice of some sort.
Then outside the realm of D&D there are games and systems that allow this kind of thing all the time.
Fair enough, but that's the arc the overall campaign will take regardless. (as opposed to, say, the 4e approach where the PCs are already heroes at 1st level)
Maybe. Depends on the game and what happens. Maybe it's a tragedy like Oedipus. The character starts out with a lot, and falls. Blades in the Dark pretty much assumes that the characters are doomed and it's just a matter of time until they're either killed by another faction or forced into retirement due to trauma.
You think they don't?
Mine don't, so this is a bit surprising to me, yeah. Do you DM for kids? I could see this being an issue with younger players or newer players, but I always got the impression you're playing with a long standing group, so I'd be surprised by that kind of thing, absolutely.
The difference being that in genre fiction at least someone (the author) knows all along that the character has a hidden noble heritage. In the reveal-on-the-fly instance in an RPG the DM didn't know ahead of time and it's entirely possible the player didn't either, if this decision was made on a whim; and that's my objection: had this been known all along even if just by the one player and the DM the odds are high that the player would have approached some things differently during the PC's adventuring career up to that point, and there's a chance the DM might have tried to work something in as well.
I don't see this as Discovery (in either big D or small d terms), I see it as nothing more than a headache for the DM - and maybe the player(s) - as they retcon the fiction to fit this new info in.
The author may or may not know something like that all along. You're thinking of it from the perspective a book that's already completed, and the players are reading it. They don't know what's to come, but the DM is the author, so he knows. But I think that an RPG is more like a book that's still being written rather than a book that's still being read.
There's no reason that something like this can't come up during play. Now, my advocacy for this is not a blanket statement that anything can be decided at any time. I think if a player wanted to try and introduce something like this spontaneously, then he and the DM need to look at what's been established, and figure out how it could be so. There may be a case where it's not possible based on what's been established. I'm not saying that this kind of thing needs to always be approved.
It's more that when others say it can't be done, I like to ask "why not?"
And by the way, did I mention there's nothing more evil than retcons?
No, but it's not surprising to hear you say that!
I personally don't mind them that much. I'd prefer to avoid them where possible, but it's impossible not to have some come up. Usually, they're my own fault. I've learned to accept it, and the best thing to do is not actually retcon something, but to just correct it. Just acknowledge the error and then move on rather than try to explain how the error wasn't actually an error.
But, I don't think that retcons are as necessary to make things like the spontaneous noble work. Because when this is revealed, you immediately think of the questions relating to "how could this be so?"
How?
How can I do anything with the idea of Falstaff in fact being King Falstaff if neither I nor his player know he's a king? If I arbitrarily introduced this as DM I'd likely get in trouble, and if the player arbitrarily introduces it then that means he's been a king all along...which leads right back to retcons.
How can you not do anything with it? It's something that kind of needs to be addressed, no?
Let's imagine an alternate world where this came up in one of your games and you decide to go with it....I don't think you're as clueless about how to deal with it as you seem to claim. You ask questions.
- Why was this not revealed till now? Seems like maybe there would be an interesting answer there.
- Why didn't the nobles of the last city we visited recognize the character? Possibly a mundane reason like they've never met, or perhaps just a case of context, or maybe the character was disguised. Or maybe there's another interesting answer here....maybe it involves magic, or a curse, or something like that.
- Why not let the other PCs know before now? Come up with a reason that works.
No retcons are necessary. this is simply new information that doesn't actually contradict the past.
Do you see how this kind of thing may excite players or GMs?
If they wait for the hour my DM instinct wouldn't say anything if they decided not to wait for another hour.
It's if the scout dies ten minutes in and suddenly the party decide to - fancy that - get on the move after ten minutes that my DM instinct flies a red flag.
But what's the difference? At the table I mean. You're not sitting there actually counting out the minutes and then at minute ten the players say "we've waited long enough". You just say "the hour passes, and the scout doesn't return. What do you do?" Boom. Get to the fun.
Maybe they're not going to find that out.
All they know is that she didn't return. Is she captured? Dead? Dying at the bottom of a cliff somewhere because she slipped and fell? Teleported halfway round the world? On her way back to town having abandoned the party and mission?
What? The players absolutely know. And the characters know that she didn't return......so I don't think it would be at all odd that they'd want to try and see what happened to her. Again, the players are concerned, and the characters would likewise be concerned.....so there's really no metagaming going on. Sure, if we want to really examine it, the players may be thinking of revenge while the characters are thinking of finding out what happened and hopefully helping their friend....but ultimately it's all leading to the same thing: moving forward.
Why would you not let them find this out? Why would a DM ever steer the game away from such a potentially dramatic moment?
I'm really not getting your point at all here.
