D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Maxperson]

Really? Is that really a thing? Genuinely. I just don't believe that this actually happens with anywhere near enough frequency to matter. Especially because--surprise surprise!--most merchants aren't going to be willing to haggle in the first place. It's frankly a ridiculous and EXTREMELY unversimilitudinous idea that somehow got lodged in the early-D&D culture-of-play that every merchant is actually SUPER down to haggle over every single price, every single time, over and over until Kingdom come. That's just not how merchants operate. It simply, flatly isn't. Sure, on rare occasions, you might get the opportunity to haggle--but every single time? No. That's flatly ridiculous.

It doesn't happen in modern stores for the most part, but it was a common practice in the time period range that D&D is set in.

If a merchant sells five torches for a silver piece, they sell five torches for a silver piece--that's legit verisimilitude. You aren't going to find a better deal because if you could, word would spread, and either the haggle-ee would go out of business because people keep demanding prices too low, or the other merchants will drop their prices to match. It's just outright ridiculous to claim that 100% of merchants will guaranteed ALWAYS be willing to even start haggling, let alone conclude doing so, let alone conclude doing so in the party's favor, let alone conclude doing so in the party's favor in a way that will make a difference umpteen-million sessions down the line maybe possibly if the stars are right and the Moon is in the House of the Wombat.

That's what the roll is for. If you lose, the merchant doesn't want to haggle with you on that item and you pay what he asks or don't buy.

If the players WANT to make a thing of it, sure, shoot. But in the vast majority of cases, they won't get the chance; in the vast majority of cases where they get a chance, it won't make a difference; in the vast majority of cases where it makes a difference today, it will never matter later on. A remnant of a remnant of a remnant of a remnant is not a compelling case. I don't practice homeopathic GMing.

Haggling as I mentioned was extremely common back then. It's entirely a player thing. If they want to haggle, they will tell the DM. If they don't, they just pay the prices the DM tells them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Your post shifts between talking about imaginary causation in the fiction, and the exercise of authorial power in the real world.

The fact that you assume that, in a RPG, it would have to be the GM who "puts their thumb on the scale", is why your approach to RPGing seems to me to be GM-centric.


These posts provide more illustration of why, to me, your approach to RPGing seems very GM-centric.

REH's Conan is supposed to be one of the principal inspirations for D&D, and FRPGing more generally. If you are saying that it would be "illogical" for FRPGing to permit Conan-esque things to happen, you've completely lost me.

I'm wondering what rule would make it impossible - in a world of gods and magic - that a secret admirer would not be able to know that a person is imprisoned, and assist them?

Nothing. But making that happen in the moment under those circumstances is the definition of story-driven play. Which I don't want.

 

[AlViking]

Your post shifts between talking about imaginary causation in the fiction, and the exercise of authorial power in the real world.

The fact that you assume that, in a RPG, it would have to be the GM who "puts their thumb on the scale", is why your approach to RPGing seems to me to be GM-centric.


These posts provide more illustration of why, to me, your approach to RPGing seems very GM-centric.

REH's Conan is supposed to be one of the principal inspirations for D&D, and FRPGing more generally. If you are saying that it would be "illogical" for FRPGing to permit Conan-esque things to happen, you've completely lost me.

I'm wondering what rule would make it impossible - in a world of gods and magic - that a secret admirer would not be able to know that a person is imprisoned, and assist them?

I fully acknowledge the role of the GM in any RPG to make the game interesting and engaging for the players. But there's a difference between providing opportunities for the characters to escape and leaving it up to the players on what opportunity to pursue and just having a Dues Ex Machina reason for them to escape. I also stated, which you seem to ignore, that sometimes there is going to be no opportunity to escape because it doesn't make any sense in the fiction.

All RPGs are GM-centric to one degree or another unless it's a GM-less game. The interaction between GM, players and the rules of the game are what differs.

 

[Maxperson]

I just...

Okay? Like if you're going to tell me that you refuse to participate in further discussion, I can't really demand anything of you otherwise. But it's just profoundly confusing to be told that there will never be situations where the GM controls events, and then be told that actually the GM will not allow some events and will allow other events. I simply don't understand how those things are reconciled. I can't ask you to speak any more on it, but it comes across as directly contradictory while denying that there could ever be any possible way to interpret it as contradictory.

The DM is more of a repair man in those situations. The vast majority of the time, nothing is broken so the DM just reacts to the players. Sometimes, things break and the DM has to step in to fix things, usually rules issues. When the DM steps in as repair man, he's ultimately the one decides how the repairs are made, though the customers(players) can discuss with the DM and offer up advice on how they think it should be done.

 

[AlViking]

It doesn't happen in modern stores for the most part, but it was a common practice in the time period range that D&D is set in.

That's what the roll is for. If you lose, the merchant doesn't want to haggle with you on that item and you pay what he asks or don't buy.

Haggling as I mentioned was extremely common back then. It's entirely a player thing. If they want to haggle, they will tell the DM. If they don't, they just pay the prices the DM tells them.

Haggling is still quite common now depending on where you are. For that matter, haggling is still standard in the US for certain products.

 

[Maxperson]

But absolute zero-context "random chance"--which is what I assume you mean by "far more often than random chance would dictate"--almost never applies?

Adventurers are, by their nature, people in a dangerous, often foolhardy "profession", if it can even be called such. They are already, by their very nature, abnormal people. They are already, by their actions, doing things which skew probability WELL outside of the bell curve of anything one might call "normal" existence.

"Random chance" for an adventurer is like trying to play poker with a tarot deck. All of the probabilities will be wildly off, and you're going to occasionally get hands that don't even have any possible score under poker rules. The probability distribution simply is not the same as it would be for a villager. (Indeed, most people are gonna have different things! A town guard is gonna see a lot more violence than a typical farmer will; a traveling merchant is braving the roads, but only occasionally visiting settled places; a wizarding student probably doesn't see much violence, but sees a heck of a lot of magical weirdness; etc.)

Before you can assert what is "far more often than random chance would dictate", you have to actually KNOW what is likely vs unlikely, and that's genuinely something most of us cannot know even in principle until we actually get some data to reason from.

Yes and no. Yes they encounter kings, monsters, and situations of note at FAR greater rates than the average Joe. In that regard chance is skewed tremendously. However, that doesn't mean that they don't haggle with merchants, walk for weeks down roads with no interesting encounters, etc. It far from ALL interesting things.

That style of play isn't for everyone and some just want to skip those parts, because they find them boring. So everything that happens in the game is interesting in some way. Even for adventurers that's far more than chance would dictate in a game like D&D.

 

[Maxperson]

Haggling is still quite common now depending on where you are. For that matter, haggling is still standard in the US for certain products.

Yeah. I know. Most often it's with mom and pop vendors. You won't for example, be able to walk into Target and haggle any prices down. Even then there are exceptions. I've picked up damage goods that were still serviceable and talked store managers into discounts ranging from 10% to 50%. That's haggling. Car purchases are haggled.

 

[pemerton]

Nothing. But making that happen in the moment under those circumstances is the definition of story-driven play. Which I don't want.

I don't know what you mean by "story driven play".

I mean, you're the guy who says that you want fiction over rules; yet you seem to be saying that (for instance) a god will only step in if the PC is a cleric who succeeds at a divine intervention roll. To me, that looks like the very definition of "rules over fiction*.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't know what you mean by "story driven play".

I mean, you're the guy who says that you want fiction over rules; yet you seem to be saying that (for instance) a god will only step in if the PC is a cleric who succeeds at a divine intervention roll. To me, that looks like the very definition of "rules over fiction*.

I never said that. But divine intervention is hardly guaranteed. If someone wants to try I generally assign a percentage chance.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

Haggling is still very much used in modern society, it has just taken the form of coupons, app discounts, member discounts, employment discounts et al.
The haggle is knowing what is available and asking for it.