D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Zardnaar]

I've repeated my reasons for my preferences many, many times. As have other's. The preferences apply no matter which side of the DM screen I sit.

It's funny. Push comes to shove me boss.

Real world not an issue 99% of the time. Twice in last decade had to pull that rope.

 

[prabe]

I don't think anyone is looking to die on a hill about 5e being perfectly written

Angels and ministers of grace preserve us.

 

[prabe]

what part of 'you know the local messengers, ..." are they misunderstanding?

How many people in the here and now know their local postal carrier by name, or the UPS and FedEx drivers whose routes their lives intersect with? Do you think not knowing those names keeps people from being able to use the mail, or the big shippers?

 

[prabe]

other side of the same continent, doesn't really change much of anything. No one knows your contact and you know no one who clearly can get a message to them, so yeah, I am perfectly fine with blithely negating it, in fact I will do so in session 0 already

Blithe negation is crap GMing. Good job, well done, have a day.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How many people in the here and now know their local postal carrier by name, or the UPS and FedEx drivers whose routes their lives intersect with? Do you think not knowing those names keeps people from being able to use the mail, or the big shippers?

Does every fantasy setting have UPS?

 

[hawkeyefan]

It is, but that doesn't make it ABOUT control.

Okay… what’s it about then?

Exercising control is not necessarily about control. At the most basic level, exercising control can be secondary to some other purpose, in which case exercising control is "about" whatever that purpose is.

More broadly, as I pointed out previously, the concept of control is freighted with complex connotations. It doesn't take much to switch from a positive or neutral connotation to a negative one when discussing control. In particular, anything that touches on control being an end in its own right (e.g. calling something "about control," suggesting that achieving control is a primary motivation) is going to carry a negative connotation for many people, whereas saying someone is "exercising control" can more easily carry a neutral connotation of doing a job, or even a positive connotation of satisfying a responsibility. Since "exercising control" and "about control" have incompatible connotations, they can't be interchangeable.

I don’t think I see them as quite as incompatible as you. But I would agree that exercising control may be about something else.

What do you think some examples could be in the context of RPGs?

 

[Old Fezziwig]

Does every fantasy setting have UPS?

Only Forgotten Packages, the new setting for Drivers & Dropshipping. Look out, here comes my level 12 elf driver with a +1 handtruck.

 

[Maxperson]

Okay… what’s it about then?

Other stuff. Could be about the circumstances making sense. Could be about balance. Could be about just about anything. It's not inherently about control. Not many people become DMs just so that they can exert control over things, and those few bad DMs that do get abandoned fairly quickly.

 

[hawkeyefan]

all you did was say 'I take it as a creative challenge' without providing any solution that was not one of those highly improbable coincidences to get it to 'work'

Right, because we were talking generally. If we were talking about a specific example, then I’d have been specific. How I worked it out would depend on the context and all the relevant factors.

Which of the things he mentioned? Creating a setting in which fate / the gods frequently intervene, so some badly designed background can always work? No. Enabling the character to establish new contacts in new places, sure, I never was against that, but that also is not what the background says

No, the part where the GM took the player’s idea into consideration, and then discussed it with them and they collaborated on a solution that worked for everyone.

because D&D does not have plenty of such moves that no one has issues with… The problem begins when it interferes with world building / the setting

How does a character knowing people interfere with anything like world-building or the setting?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Other stuff. Could be about the circumstances making sense. Could be about balance. Could be about just about anything. It's not inherently about control. Not many people become DMs just so that they can exert control over things, and those few bad DMs that do get abandoned fairly quickly.

So you don’t see how those are examples of controlling different elements?

Let me clarify again… I don’t think it’s inherently bad for DMs to want to have control over some elements of the game. I’m questioning the feeling that they need to have such strong control, but I’m not saying it’s inherently bad.

As for your assessment about DMs who control things being abandoned very quickly, I think your assessment is way off. Plenty of folks here fit the category and all seem to be playing regularly.