Search results

Well, no, not exactly. This is you inferring something that's not really what I'm talking about. My decision making for Clara was entirely based on what I expected her to do. Author stance is more about making decisions based on what the player wants to happen in "the story". That's not really...

Yes, really. And largely for the exact reason you site… it’s used as an example because everyone’s familiar with it rather than because it’s a good example. No. Other systems are designed with thought on how to handle this kind of stuff. The “issues”, such as they are, boil down to you not...

Because most of the time, I don’t feel the events of play the way my character does. Certainly not to the extent or depth that they do, anyway. Nor do I expect that most of us do. I had a character in The Between… Clara Norhurst. She was a pretty complicated character, and while I had sympathy...

Sure. I mean… a lot of the conflict in this discussion seems to come from trying to do this in D&D… which is ill-suited for it and isn’t really designed to handle it.

I don’t believe that’s exactly correct… though it is possible I’ve missed some posts. Mostly, I think people advocating for any kind of rules that dictate character behavior in some way are talking about something more nuanced than reversing D&D’s PC to NPC dynamic RE social skills. I think...

You’re mixing things up again. No one uses skills for NPCs to influence PCs as you’re stating. I don’t believe anyone has advocated for that in this thread. I believe there was some “well why not” types of posts, but I don’t think anyone has said that this is how D&D plays or should play, If...

Well, I thought we were talking about such checks dictating how PCs behave… the major thrust of your argument is about how you know and understand the character better than any mechanical process could replicate. So I don’t think what you’re describing really addresses that in any way. As for...

You know what’s terrible? When D&D combat… with all its options and different class roles and abilities… is resolved with a coin flip. It just doesn’t take any of the characters’ abilities or agency into consideration. I know no one does that, but I wish they wouldn’t!

But what is “it”? Is this the way you play D&D? Is it an example from anyone’s actual game? As far as I can tell, you’re describing something that no one does and saying it’s bad.

This is because what you’re describing isn’t an example of thoughtful design. You’re just kind of taking an instance of D&D play and then supposing “a dice roll is made to decide it”. But that’s not the way D&D works, nor is it the way games that do incorporate these things into play work...

Well, is a roll in combat a test of the character in any way? I mean, I could see the argument that a 14th level fighter with high strength, weapon focus, and a magic sword has a +12 to hit… which is indicative of his fighting skill, right? Sure. I’m talking about something generally a bit...

Yeah, that was largely why I asked “what does authentic even mean?” Like, earlier in the thread we had people saying that a GM may say that a player isn’t playing their character “correctly”. But I don’t really even know what that means other than “differently than I expected”. Maybe. i don’t...

I find that this need for control over the PC correlates to the player’s ability (or lack thereof) to influence the game in ways “beyond the character”. Less of one often means more of the other. Sure… and a GM can do that. Like your example of loyalty to a lord versus faith to a beloved...

I suppose I can see that. But I also think “Stress” is broad enough to kind of mold to the situation. Like, I’ve done things in life that didn’t stress me at the time I did them, but then did some time later.

Although I come down on this closer to @zakael19 I think it’s important to point out that Stress is not used solely for Flashbacks. Its other applications… to Push, activate abilities, or to Resist Consequences… are far less “meta” than Flashbacks might be categorized. So I don’t think...

To me, this kind of situation is more a question of why does it matter so much that the PC shouldn’t know the NPC is lying? I mean, if we’re putting it to a roll of some sort, then it seems the chance that the PC knows the NPC is lying is on the table. So if that’s the case, I don’t see the...

Uncaged: Faces of Sigil is a AD&D2e book that really helps flesh out the city of Sigil for the Planescape setting. It’s a set of many NPCs, with different connections between them all, with competing goals and motives, and associated locations. More about the dwellers in the city than a city...

What you’re saying is that it’s not a problem for your game or any game you’ve ever seen… but that it’s a problem. So who’s it a problem for? The people who are telling you it’s not a problem for them? My point is that you say that all you’re doing is stating your preference. But that’s not...

I don’t think that’s quite what was said… but either way, you’re judging other playstyles just as much as anyone else is.

So just don’t reply. If it’s never been a problem for you or any table you’ve ever seen, then describing it as a problem as you have seems to be just about judging others’ preferences, no? And we all know how you feel about that. Sometimes it’s okay to just not respond, Micah.