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

[Swarmkeeper]

"I smash the vase!" clear and committed!
vague: of uncertain, indefinite, or unclear character or meaning.
The statement is not vague!
uncommitted: not committed to a cause, activity, etc.
The statement shows full commitment.
Please, your attempts at Magic Wordsmithing, can't make words say things they don't mean.

And sometimes the "How" can matter in the game world.

 

[greg kaye]

And sometimes the "How" can matter in the game world.

Absolutely. But, it seems ironic in a discussion about clarity, that contributors can attempt to use words in ways contrary to their meanings.

 

[iserith]

Which is exactly what every DM does if a player doesn't give them sufficient information (and there is sometimes no way that a player can know what information is required) to make an adjudication. It's called playing the game, it's not a punishment.

Fully agree - but there are folks in this thread who have stated or otherwise agreed that asking for clarification tips the player off that something may be up, leading to "metagaming" and "takebacks." So they try to avoid that by establishing for the player what their character does, which can lead to conflict. It's this approach for which I've shown the downsides. The upside to my approach is that the player does this up front so there's rarely a need to ask for clarifying questions, and since the expectation exists for all action declarations, this mitigates against "metagaming."

 

[iserith]

"I smash the vase!" clear and committed!
vague: of uncertain, indefinite, or unclear character or meaning.
The statement is not vague!
uncommitted: not committed to a cause, activity, etc.
The statement shows full commitment.
Please, your attempts at Magic Wordsmithing, can't make words say things they don't mean.

It's uncommitted in that they have not committed to how they smash the vase, either intentionally or unintentionally. They've committed to a goal (smashing the vase) but not the approach. The approach can affect the adjudication and narration.

 

[Umbran]

Some people don't like dictators. Even petty ones.

Mod Note:
We're going to need the rhetoric here to walk back several notches. Keep it kindly and friendly, and much less accusatory, please.

 

[Charlaquin]

I thought that this presented a good option for how to handle things.

Not for me, as I I specifically want to avoid having to establish for the player what their character does (e.g. “ok, you pick up the vase and smash it against the floor”), and having to stop play and hash out the specifics of the action in the midst of the resolution process (e.g. “No, wait, I don't want to touch it. I want to hit it with a sling bullet from across the room”).

 

[Charlaquin]

That disclaimer says: "... Other DMs may adjudicate actions differently based on their own understanding of the game and their own experiences. ..."
So this an admittance that various of the content wouldn't work for everyone?

@iserith has never claimed that his approach works for everyone.

 

[Charlaquin]

Like the "erroneous assertion" that my game runs perfectly well without taking your approach?

@iserith has never called that assertion erroneous

 

[Charlaquin]

"I smash the vase!" clear and committed!
vague: of uncertain, indefinite, or unclear character or meaning.
The statement is not vague!
uncommitted: not committed to a cause, activity, etc.
The statement shows full commitment.
Please, your attempts at Magic Wordsmithing, can't make words say things they don't mean.

It is uncertain how the character smashes the vase.

 

[greg kaye]

I thought that this presented a good option for how to handle things.

Not for me, as I I specifically want to avoid having to establish for the player what their character does (e.g. “ok, you pick up the vase and smash it against the floor”), and having to stop play and hash out the specifics of the action in the midst of the resolution process (e.g. “No, wait, I don't want to touch it. I want to hit it with a sling bullet from across the room”).

Fair enough and, as you've just referenced, different people perhaps with different groups may find different things to work. This is where the agree do differ thing can come in.