D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Oofta]

If someone tells me that the fiction I'm creating in my RPGing is improbable nonsense, I assume that they mean what they say.

Conversely, if someone does not think that there is anyone who is producing improbable nonsense, then why even mention that possibility?

If a piece of fiction regularly relies on extreme coincidence on a regular basis, it isn't for me. A lot of people like types of fiction I don't, it's not an insult to acknowledge that.

P.S. I have never used the words "improbable nonsense".

 

[Emerikol]

Well, if you chose a background that realistically have you a chance to know more people, then I would roll for it against some DC. I wouldn't just say yes every single time. The player would say to the DM, "Do I know anyone in this town?"

Personally, I'd prefer to work that out ahead of time. When we develop the character if you want to know someone in every port you chanced to visit then let's work up the details. Then I have no problem with it.

 

[Oofta]

No need for you or anyone else to apologize! I don’t mind judgmental comments… I’m down for some criticism. No one’s gonna be more harsh about my gaming than me, to be honest.

My point was more to point out how casually @Oofta says the kinds of things about others’ games that, when said about his, are cited as unacceptable.

I've been careful to be very clear that I'm just talking about my own personal preferences. Other people's styles and preferences are their own. We all have things we like and do not like, just because I don't like cooked carrots and don't like eating them does not mean if you like cooked carrots that it's an insult.

 

[Emerikol]

So while you claim to not be talking crap about others' games, here you are talking crap. And if anyone does anything remotely like this about descriptions of your games, you never let it go.

For him it is groan inducing. For many it probably is but for others it is not. Yes he used derogatory language as you do often. But he is showing how it makes him feel. Why he rejects it is that it produces that groan inside him that the whole thing is a farce. I would agree with him on this fact. But he was talking about his personal feelings on the matter.

So, here's the thing. I don't say what you prefer can't be taken seriously or that it's groan inducing. I try not to pass judgment on it in any way. I may say that it's about control or something you disagree with, but I am saying that only as an assessment of its description. But I really try not to pass judgment or describe how little I'd enjoy such a game or anything like that.

Really? Control is not an insult as you used it? I think not. In fact you didn't caveat and say "this feels more controlling to me" but instead you just stated it matter of factly.

That aside... you can't think of any literary characters who knew people? Who had contacts when they went places who could help them out? Is it really that hard to imagine such a person to exist? Is such an advantage really that game altering?

I think the objection is the player just handwaving such people into existence as needed. I'd be fine ahead of time defining some NPCs that the player knew if his or her schtick was knowing a lot of people.

 

[Oofta]

I’m just pointing out how casually you dismiss the ideas of others and yet when it’s done to you, or even just when you perceive it may be happening, you never hesitate to point it out.



Yes… based on control!

This is my point. If we get past this preference shield… if we examine the reasons for it… why does one prefer for only the DM to decide these things… it’s about control. Control of the story or the setting or “realism” or the aesthetics of play.

So if I don't share your preference for how the game runs, if I prefer the way D&D has established the roles of the game, I'm somehow ... dismissing that you like something I don't like? I don't like something you like. Big deal. We don't have to like the same things.

It's not about control, it's about separation of responsibilities.

 

[Emerikol]

A lot of this comes down to what does the player know vs what does the character know. The character knows more about many things than the player and the player knows things the character doesn't also.

Sometimes when it comes to knowledge about the world that the character knows and the player does not, we have to decide how that knowledge is gotten. Some of you want the player to make it up. I do not. I want the player to query the DM and the DM to answer with the relevant information. If the DM has not recorded it in advance then I want the DM to determine the probabilities of various options and roll a dice.

 

[Oofta]

It was clear from the backgrounds thread that it's a skill issue. Some people could spontaneously and easily think of ways a noble might get themselves an invite from the hobgoblin court, or a sailor might use their common experience to make friends with a sailor from a different culture. Other people couldn't think of any ways these things could happen beyond 'being a noble is a magical charm effect' or 'sailors must know everyone in the world'.

So now it's a failing of the DM if they can't make it work?

 

[dave2008]

if it is probable and obscure, I'd say I'd probably allow it. I do not need to say 'no' every time, I just do not need to say 'yes' every time either, no matter how poorly thought out or phrased the background is

I don't necessarily think the backgrounds are poorly thought out or phrased. I think they assumed some rational judgement by DM's and players. That was their mistake!

 

[Oofta]

I don't necessarily think the backgrounds are poorly thought out or phrased. I think they assumed some rational judgement by DM's and players. That was their mistake!

Some of it comes down to interpretation. Like the PC with a noble background being able to get an audience with a local noble. Where "local" was interpreted as local to wherever the PC happened to be. Even then I disagreed with it, if the lore of the world has direct conflict between two royal houses then it makes no sense that you could automatically get an audience. Getting an audience because the warring faction wants to hold you for ransom is probably not what people had in mind. Or a criminal that has a contact even though they were just magically transported to a world they've never heard of.

I thought the benefits were too concrete and if taken literally meant something must happen no matter how illogical under the current circumstances.

 

[Emerikol]

Some of it comes down to interpretation. <snip>

I thought the benefits were too concrete and if taken literally meant something must happen no matter how illogical under the current circumstances.

It is a trap for inexperienced DMs. If I allowed such a background into my campaign, I'd figure out who their family was and how they fit into the world. I'd have to do that running the sort of game I run.

I think though that some degree of family tree planning has to be done anyway if the family is going to be part of the world. You could have a campaign where the PC is far from home and it doesn't matter. If it could matter, it matters to the DM.