Search results

You did read the post that was linked, right? That's a player not engaging with the game. Their DM was complaining about them.

I don't have players who need consequences just to play appropriately. Good players jump on hooks that allow them to demonstrate their character concept.

I'm pretty much always OK if the player is on board. The "willfully violate" portion of the text is important, and definitely eases concerns I might otherwise have.

I agree with all of this. The point where we may differ, I believe, is that I don't feel like removing a character's power (like is often advocated for clerics, paladins, and warlocks) is ever an appropriate consequence within the game, and I actively shape my settings' cosmological...

But we all had fun, and isn't that the real goal?

Agree with all of that. It's why I generally prefer to use Wisdom as a the stat for general awareness, which can be both physical and supernatural, rather than "common sense".

There was no criticism. "GM fiat", and the expectation of the setting acting with agency that goes along with it, is a necessary and desired component for principled approaches to sim/trad play.

Theoretically, a low-Wis character who keeps warning the party away from rash decisions could be viewed in "violation" of expectations, I suppose.

<cracks knuckles> Let it begin.

WHAT'S YOUR ALTERNATIVE!!! :LOL:

Maybe it's the part of me that likes OSR, but that just sounds like an emergent story. The character is kind of like Homer Simpson in the boxing episode; he can take a ton of abuse, but he's not going to win any races or fight off getting sick.

I'm assuming chocolate-strawberry-death bans multiclassing for the realism.

Not a problem, just wanted to clarify I wasn't hopping into a topic about someone else. I'm happy to own my opinions. :)

Exactly. I could also have a realistic process for a random chance of the characters having incurable magical cancer, but I don't implement that because that's sounds horrible at the table, no matter how realistic it is.

I did have an alternative; don't do that story!

As "that poster", that is correct. Like most things in life, it's easy to gloss over distinctions between things you're not particularly interested in.

Sorry! I could hypothesize, but it would be all guesswork.

Not sure. I've never tried.

I just don't do "you had something stolen" storylines. In my experience, it doesn't lead to compelling gameplay. I haven't had players clamoring to be pickpocketed from, well, ever.

As one of the vehement posters, I would point out that "GM shouldn't limit player choice" and "worldbuilding belongs exclusively to the players" has a large, large amount of space between those two positions. Racial and class choices are a very small part of worldbuilding.