Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7580654" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Your claim - which I have just quoted - was that if a player uses the <em>uncle</em> device to underpin an imputation to his/her PC of his/her knowledge about trolls, then that player will also want to use the same device to have the GM inform him/her about new, hitherto unknown weaknesses.</p><p></p><p>But that claim was, and is, unfounded. ecause If a player <em>don't actually know</em>, then when playing an ignorant PC who tries to guess the weakness, s/he is not <em>feiging</em> ignorance.</p><p></p><p>In 4e, at least, t's not cheating to know that trolls need fire to kill them even if the topic has never come up before in the campaign. And it's not cheating to impute that knowledge to one's PC.</p><p></p><p>Or to put it another way: there is no rule in 4e that says <em>In a given campaign, the first time trolls are encounteed players who know their weakness are obliged nevertheless to pretend that their PCs are ignorant of the weakness, until something happens to confer that knowledge in the course of play</em>. Nor is there any rule that even hints at this.</p><p></p><p>From the 4e PHB, p 18:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong><u>Roleplaying</u></strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The Dungeons & Dragons game is, first and foremost, a roleplaying game, which means that it's all about taking on the role of a character in the game. Some people take to this payacting naturally and easily; others find it more of a challenge. This section is here to help you out, whether you're comfortable and familiar with roleplaying or you're new to the concept.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Your character is more than a combination of race, class, and feats. He or she is also one of the protagonists in a living, evolving story line. Like th hero of any fantasy novel or film, he or she has ambitions and fears, likes and dislikes, otivations and mannerisms, moments of glory and of failure. The best D&D characters belnd the ongoing story of their adventuring career with memorable characterisitcs or traits. . . . A well-crafted character personality expands your experience o the game dramatically.</p><p></p><p>What follows this is a series of headings, which suggest various ways of developing the non-mechanical aspects of one's PC: <em>Alignment</em>, <em>Deities</em>, <em>Personality</em>, <em>Mannerisms</em>, <em>Appearance</em> and <em>Background</em>. Nothing suggests that all these things must be specified in advance of play - and the general tenor of the introductory text, as just quoted by me, is that someone might do this as they go along to enrich their RPG experience.</p><p></p><p>Then there is this, at p 258, under the heading <strong>Quests</strong>:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Sometimes a quest is spelled out for you at the start of an adventure . . . You can also, with your DM's approval, create a quest for your character. Such a quest can tie into your character's background. For instance, perhaps your mother is the person whose remains lie in the Fortress of the Iron Ring. . . . Individual quests give you a stake in a campaign's unfolding story and give your DM ingredients to help develop that story.</p><p></p><p>Complementing that text from the PHB is this from the DMG (p 103):</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong><u>Player-Designed Quests</u></strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">You should allow and even encourage payers to come up with their own quests that are tied to their invididual goals or specific circumstances in the adventure. . . . Rember to say yes as often as possible!</p><p></p><p>Nothing in what I've quoted is unrepresentative of 4e; it is typical of it. 4e does not encourage the gating of player contributions to the fiction - in the form of backgrounds and backstory, PC goals, etc - behind GM veto and tight GM control. Quite the opposite.</p><p></p><p>If a 4e player knows about trolls, and imputes that knowledge to his/her PC, that is not breaking any rule of the game. If the player comes up with some bit of backstory to give colour to that imputation of knowledge, that is not breaking any rule either. 4e simply doesn't work in the way that you are describing.</p><p></p><p>It's indeed bizarre that this even needs arguing - it's not like people who didn't/don't like 4e were jumping at shadows. There are actual features of the game that make it different from (say) typical approaches to 3E/PF, and its orientation towards player contributions to the shared fiction - which has obvious implications also for the GM's role in that respect - is just one of them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7580654, member: 42582"] Your claim - which I have just quoted - was that if a player uses the [I]uncle[/I] device to underpin an imputation to his/her PC of his/her knowledge about trolls, then that player will also want to use the same device to have the GM inform him/her about new, hitherto unknown weaknesses. But that claim was, and is, unfounded. ecause If a player [I]don't actually know[/I], then when playing an ignorant PC who tries to guess the weakness, s/he is not [I]feiging[/I] ignorance. In 4e, at least, t's not cheating to know that trolls need fire to kill them even if the topic has never come up before in the campaign. And it's not cheating to impute that knowledge to one's PC. Or to put it another way: there is no rule in 4e that says [I]In a given campaign, the first time trolls are encounteed players who know their weakness are obliged nevertheless to pretend that their PCs are ignorant of the weakness, until something happens to confer that knowledge in the course of play[/I]. Nor is there any rule that even hints at this. From the 4e PHB, p 18: [indent][B][U]Roleplaying[/U][/B] The Dungeons & Dragons game is, first and foremost, a roleplaying game, which means that it's all about taking on the role of a character in the game. Some people take to this payacting naturally and easily; others find it more of a challenge. This section is here to help you out, whether you're comfortable and familiar with roleplaying or you're new to the concept. Your character is more than a combination of race, class, and feats. He or she is also one of the protagonists in a living, evolving story line. Like th hero of any fantasy novel or film, he or she has ambitions and fears, likes and dislikes, otivations and mannerisms, moments of glory and of failure. The best D&D characters belnd the ongoing story of their adventuring career with memorable characterisitcs or traits. . . . A well-crafted character personality expands your experience o the game dramatically.[/indent] What follows this is a series of headings, which suggest various ways of developing the non-mechanical aspects of one's PC: [I]Alignment[/I], [I]Deities[/I], [I]Personality[/I], [I]Mannerisms[/I], [I]Appearance[/I] and [I]Background[/I]. Nothing suggests that all these things must be specified in advance of play - and the general tenor of the introductory text, as just quoted by me, is that someone might do this as they go along to enrich their RPG experience. Then there is this, at p 258, under the heading [B]Quests[/B]: [indent]Sometimes a quest is spelled out for you at the start of an adventure . . . You can also, with your DM's approval, create a quest for your character. Such a quest can tie into your character's background. For instance, perhaps your mother is the person whose remains lie in the Fortress of the Iron Ring. . . . Individual quests give you a stake in a campaign's unfolding story and give your DM ingredients to help develop that story.[/indent] Complementing that text from the PHB is this from the DMG (p 103): [indent][B][U]Player-Designed Quests[/U][/B] You should allow and even encourage payers to come up with their own quests that are tied to their invididual goals or specific circumstances in the adventure. . . . Rember to say yes as often as possible![/indent] Nothing in what I've quoted is unrepresentative of 4e; it is typical of it. 4e does not encourage the gating of player contributions to the fiction - in the form of backgrounds and backstory, PC goals, etc - behind GM veto and tight GM control. Quite the opposite. If a 4e player knows about trolls, and imputes that knowledge to his/her PC, that is not breaking any rule of the game. If the player comes up with some bit of backstory to give colour to that imputation of knowledge, that is not breaking any rule either. 4e simply doesn't work in the way that you are describing. It's indeed bizarre that this even needs arguing - it's not like people who didn't/don't like 4e were jumping at shadows. There are actual features of the game that make it different from (say) typical approaches to 3E/PF, and its orientation towards player contributions to the shared fiction - which has obvious implications also for the GM's role in that respect - is just one of them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top