D&D 5E Do you let PC's just *break* objects?

[iserith]

you're not agreeing. Bacon Bit's said:

There was a conditional clause.

No, the rules do that.
What gives you de facto permission, on your table, to make demands about the extent to which players make their declarations?

Please don't tell me I don't agree with someone when I do. I have no problem saying when I don't, as you can no doubt see. And Bacon Bits can speak for themselves.

The players give me permission to make the ask (again, not the demand). They further buy in when I ask them for clarity, if needed, and they offer an answer.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't demand. I ask that players state a clear goal and approach. And I explain why it's important - so they can act with agency and I can fairly adjudicate their action without a lot of back and forth slowing down the game. That seems like a normal conversation to me of getting on the same page before the game begins, not an adversarial one.

It seems like a good way to put the players' backs up to me.

I could walk into a classroom (I'm a teacher) and state that students should be silent and attentive at all times. I could explain why it was important.

And then I would be covered in spitballs the moment my back was turned.

 

[iserith]

So is it the extent of the communication that you're talking about or would you describe it as something else? "I smash the vase", for what it says, is pretty clear.

As stated, goal and approach. What do you want to do and how do you go about that. "I smash the vase" is what you want to do. It does not mention how you go about it (e.g. with my bare hands, with mage hand knocking it to the ground, with the end of my staff, etc.). That information is needed to adjudicate and narrate without the DM assuming or establishing what the character is doing.

 

[greg kaye]

Please don't tell me I don't agree with someone when I do. I have no problem saying when I don't, as you can no doubt see. And Bacon Bits can speak for themselves.

The players give me permission to make the ask (again, not the demand). They further buy in when I ask them for clarity, if needed, and they offer an answer.

Here, I believe this fixes it for you.

I fully agree that the player should clearly communicate what they want to do [if they wish to retain agency], including if they are having the character act carelessly. ...

Would that have better related to the referred-to statement?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Nobody's demanding anything, as stated above.

Whatever. You asked them for clarity in session zero, and it had no effect, since you have to ask them again.

 

[iserith]

It seems like a good way to put the players' backs up up to me.

I could walk into a classroom (I'm a teacher) and state that students should be silent and attentive at all times. I could explain why it was important.

And then I would be covered in spitballs the moment my back was turned.

So far so good. My experience is that players embrace this really quickly, especially the ones who are used to the DM describing what their characters do for them. Many of them go on to complain about DMs in other games saying what they do, even when they've told the DM specifically what they were attempting and how. (DMs do this a lot in my experience.)

 

[greg kaye]

As stated, goal and approach. What do you want to do and how do you go about that. "I smash the vase" is what you want to do. It does not mention how you go about it (e.g. with my bare hands, with mage hand knocking it to the ground, with the end of my staff, etc.). That information is needed to adjudicate and narrate without the DM assuming or establishing what the character is doing.

If you want to make demands about the extent to which players communicate declarations, you do you. Enjoy.

 

[iserith]

Here, I believe this fixes it for you.

Would that have better related to the referred-to statement?

I stand by what I wrote.

 

[iserith]

Whatever. You asked them for clarity in session zero, and it had no effect, since you have to ask them again.

I find this to be an unusual statement from someone who claims to be a teacher. Do your students always pick up a new concept the very first time you teach it? Or are there some that take a little bit of time to get adjusted?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Would that have better related to the referred-to statement?

You could use session zero to insist on correct grammar at all times. And if a player uses the word "snuck" they are attacked by a balor.