D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[mamba]

I don't even know what it is you're trying to say anymore. But I'm still pretty sure it's wrong.

great approach right there ‘I am not sure what you are saying, but I am pretty sure you are wrong’…

Focus on the last sentence ‘in the game world the difference is that one is controlled by the player and the other by the DM, that is it’ and the rest is saying who is a PC and who is an NPC is the luck of the draw, no more.

In the world the NPC cobbler and the PC blacksmith turned 1st level Fighter setting out on their first adventure are equally important. What will eventually set them apart is what they do, nothing else

 

[Mort]

In the world the NPC cobbler and the PC blacksmith turned 1st level Fighter setting out on their first adventure are equally important. What will eventually set them apart is what they do, nothing else

I'm curious how far you really take this sentence.

The NPC cobbler is a fictional construct who's place is solely dictated by the DM.

The PC Blacksmith/Fighter is, of course, fictional but is directed by a player at your table who's there to have fun exploring your world and hopefully shape a place for their PC in it.

Are you saying that you direct as much effort at the cobbler as you do towards the PC?

Because, to be honest, I've had some REALLY bad experiences with DMs more invested in their world than they were in making sure the players had fun in it.

I was actually in a group that collectively decided to quit the DM when (after a few sessions) we realized we were accomplishing absolutely nothing because the NPCs were literally the only ones allowed to make a dent in the world. Heck the DM wouldn't even let us actually beat the BBEG, he had his own NPCs swoop in and do it (After decades, I still remember being dumbfounded and asking the other players "so are we supposed to clap and cheer here?")

 

[mamba]

The NPC cobbler is a fictional construct who's place is solely dictated by the DM.

yes

The PC Blacksmith/Fighter is, of course, fictional but is directed by a player at your table

yes

who's there to have fun exploring your world and hopefully shape a place for their PC in it.

Are you saying that you direct as much effort at the cobbler as you do towards the PC?

no, the cobbler is not one of the main characters in the story, probably not even an important NPC, he gets as much attention as is needed for the story. The point is the NPCs do not realize that, for them and the world at large there is no difference between them and the PCs. The PCs are not some chosen ones that are universally recognized or in some other form set apart from the rest of the population conceptually.

I am not trying to simulate an entire world one NPC at a time, I just do not treat the PCs as inherently more special to the world.

I was actually in a group that collectively decided to quit the DM when (after a few sessions) we realized we were accomplishing absolutely nothing because the NPCs were literally the only ones allowed to make a dent in the world. Heck the DM wouldn't even let us actually beat the BBEG, he had his own NPCs swoop in and do it

yeah, that is pretty bad, the closest I ever got to that is the players being able to convince a second in command to switch sides and help them to take out the BBEG (or not, the option was there, it is not being forced on them). I do not want to steal the spotlight from them, that is not the point.

Just because the story focuses on them does not mean that the world revolves around them and is aware of that however. If they do not do something, that something is not sitting there frozen in time until they get around to it, it can escalate or it can disappear because someone else took care of it.

 

[pemerton]

In earlier editions of the game, as well as in official play and tournament formats, the players are encouraged or even incentivized to use what ever means at their PCs disposal, plus their own ingenuity and cleverness, to accomplish their goals. Are you saying those aren't RPGs?

No. Even in those games, though, fictional position matters. Players aren't expected - for instance - to try and argue that their fully-armoured warrior can float across the river by clinging onto a tiny twig. Players are expected to take the fiction seriously.

And once again, this seems relevant:

The key assumption throughout all these games is that if a gaming experience is to be intelligent . . . then the most players can be relied upon to provide is kind of the "Id" of play - strategizing, killing, and conniving throughout the session. They are the raw energy, the driving "go," and the GM's role is to say, "You just scrap, strive, and kill, and I'll show ya, with this book, how it's all a brilliant evocative fantasy." . . .

The Explorative, imaginative pleasure experienced by a player - and most importantly, communicated among players - simply doesn't factor into play at all . . .​

What I keep reading, in this thread, is that if the players are allowed to make "big" moves based on their PC's backgrounds - moves like "I ask around to find out who can get a message back to <my criminal contact>" - then the integrity of the shared fiction is in jeopardy, and that only the GM can be trusted to make sure that things don't degenerate into implausible nonsense.

This is also why I don't share the opinion that the best, or only, way to create a rich, immersive sense of the fiction is the sort of GM control that is being advocated. Because if players are ignoring fictional position and pushing the fiction towards implausible nonsense, that suggests that they're not immersed at all, but are actually experiencing the fiction as nothing but a shallow veneer.

 

[tetrasodium]

Between a cobbler and a wizard? This is a strange hill to die on.



Well the differences between PCs and NPCs pretty clear. They clearly follow some different rules, even if they share many.

And yes, Iron Man is pretend. So is Spider-Man. When I watch an Iron Man movie or read an Iron Man comic, if Spider-Man doesn’t appear as relevant to the story, then he’s not “doing” anything.



The comment is not at all directed at anyone’s preferences unless they prefer crappy analogies to useful ones.



But the background features don’t let you influence anyone no matter what. They let you influence certain people under certain circumstances. Which is what skill use also allows.

There's a difference between "influence" and you specifically being outraged for not enjoying the expectation of successfully completing an uninterrupted long rest before fleeing town thanks to random barn owner villagers choosing to hide the party from the duke's guards who were actively searching for them. I linked to that 195 page thread over that very bit of outrage in order to avoid rehashing this very sort of wedge over a rules subsystem that even wotc saw fit to cut.

 

[Maxperson]

5e Background is a singular thing. It generally gives exactly 1 big benefit. So the DM, assuming this is a consistent player really should know that they would like to use the feature.

1 minor benefit. None of those abilities are big. They are just an interesting little extra. When I run my game, the backgrounds have much more impact on gameplay outside of those minor abilities than the abilities do.

 

[Maxperson]

Would you ever cut off and eat your own limbs?

What, not even if you were trapped under a boulder with no food or help, miles from anywhere? Hah, gotcha!

Therefore all autocannibalism is fine, we disagree only on the trivial question of frequency.

In this TED talk I will

It's not really a gotcha. It establishes what you will do. How about if you are floating in a powerless boat in the middle of the ocean, or if your plane crashes in the middle of nowhere and you are one of the few survivors. Once we've established that you will eat another person, there are multiple different examples of when you will do it. That doesn't make it common. It doesn't mean that you will just become Jeffrey Dahmer or that you will be looking to eat people. Just that there are circumstances under which you will engage in cannibalism.

It's no different than those of us on our side are saying. Going to other worlds, times, etc. are rare, but when those rare instances happen, you aren't going to find Cousin Vinny there to send a message for you.

 

[Maxperson]

For me, unless all communication from that plane was cut off (like Carceri - that's the plane's whole schtick) then I don't see why the ability shouldn't work - even then. That, for me, would be part of the fun of it.

That said, If I'm not the DM - I'd certainly respect the DMs decision -

BUT and I suspect where @soviet and @prabe, among others, are getting frustrated is the constant - but there need to be limits. but there needs to be exceptions! and the belief that these "exceptions" would subsume the rule to such a degree - why even have it?

But if not, if we're really not that far apart? Great! Hopefully, at the end of the day, it's just talking about fun ways to give players the best experiences.

Change "need" to "are." There don't need to be exceptions. There ARE exceptions. I'm wondering why you think backgrounds should be immune when nothing else in the game is. D&D is an exceptions based system. You can't breathe underwater unless you are one of the rare exceptions(triton/sea elf/water breathing spell). You can cast spells unless you are in front of a beholder or in an anti-magic zone. You can hurt creatures with this sword unless you can't hurt this particular monster with swords.

Why should backgrounds be the one thing in the game immune to exceptions that cause them not to function now and then?

 

[Maxperson]

• PCs are ancient greeks who get shipwrecked and end up on Monster Island with no immediate way back

Monster Island as in where Godzilla and the others live? Of an island with a bunch of monsters?

 

[Maxperson]

Oh mine weren't twists, they were in the campaign pitches. But each time I had new players so I had to be vigilant about their background choices and such to make sure that they weren't wasting their time, right?

I guess my group is weird. We wouldn't bother not picking something like Criminal for a background, even if we knew were going to end up isolated on Monster Island or on anther plane. We play for character concept far more than the abilities behind those concepts. If the Criminal background was what fit my PC, I'd take it even if I never got to use the minor ability that it gives.