D&D General A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

[pemerton]

There's no problem if that's your preference.

OK. But I'm asking @CreamCloud0 - and, if you like, you - what the problem is.

 

[pemerton]

I'm not sure why you keep explaining this to me. I have said several times that I am fine with players inferring certain things. I just feel that getting everyone to imagine the same sort of stuff in the first place is helped by the GM including anchoring information in their initial description. Like do you have something against the GM telling how crowded the bar is when they first describe it?

No.

But look at your phrase "anchoring information". The only way that the GM can guarantee the narration of anchoring information is if the game is a railroad. (The metaphors are mixed, but I think nevertheless clear enough.)

Otherwise, there is always the possibility of the player treating something as salient that the GM didn't think of.

And it is this foundational possibility that I am drawing attention to.

 

[CreamCloud0]

OK. But I'm asking @CreamCloud0 - and, if you like, you - what the problem is.

The problem is the same issue you seem to have with our preferred playstyle: we find it un-immersive.

 

[pemerton]

I sure have tried!

Thus the character cannot leave town or camp alone, making @Lanefan's original assumption that you mocked correct?

If you want to talk about Torchbearer, start a thread and I will post in it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Thank you.

Now, to take this all the way back to what prompted my engagement in this particular topic in this thread:
As I posted upthread, this is an empirical conjecture, and is false.

There may be some RPGers for whom (say) the ability to give it your all by spending points on bonus dice disconnects them from their PC's decision.

But that is not true in general.

Mate. That quote of mine is not even from this tread.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

If you want to talk about Torchbearer, start a thread and I will post in it.

Cool. I won't. But I now assume @Lanefan was correct.

 

[soviet]

A player can of course make reasonable assumptions. That there's air unless I say otherwise, that trees in my world are green, that horses have 4 legs and whinny unless I tell them otherwise. If you're in the wilderness, most areas will have dirt (there are, of course exceptions). But if they're in a bar and I haven't established that there is music playing and they state that they go up to the band and ask for a specific tune I'll tell them that there is no band or music.

Is that because if there was a band or music you would have said so, therefore if you haven't said so it definitely doesn't exist (either because it's in your prep or because you've committed to a particular vision of the bar in your head already?

What if you simply didn't consider whether or not a band could be there? Does the player making the assumption there's a band and asking for a tune from them constitute such an overstep that you automatically say there isn't one? If the player asked instead, might the result be different?

It just seems to me that 'a band exists and is playing' is a very plausible assumption Yes there might be some bars where music is banned, or looked down on, etc. But generally if I was GMing, even in a very traditional game, I would think i) this is a very plausible assumption the player has made, maybe other players have also made it, and it will hurt their immersion to say no, and ii) the player quite likely has a cool moment or strategy they are hoping to set up here. I would either allow it or at the least I would assign it a % chance of the band existing.

I'm not sure what's gained by always saying no to this.

 

[Oofta]

Is that because if there was a band or music you would have said so, therefore if you haven't said so it definitely doesn't exist (either because it's in your prep or because you've committed to a particular vision of the bar in your head already?

What if you simply didn't consider whether or not a band could be there? Does the player making the assumption there's a band and asking for a tune from them constitute such an overstep that you automatically say there isn't one? If the player asked instead, might the result be different?

It just seems to me that 'a band exists and is playing' is a very plausible assumption Yes there might be some bars where music is banned, or looked down on, etc. But generally if I was GMing, even in a very traditional game, I would think i) this is a very plausible assumption the player has made, maybe other players have also made it, and it will hurt their immersion to say no, and ii) the player quite likely has a cool moment or strategy they are hoping to set up here. I would either allow it or at the least I would assign it a % chance of the band existing.

I'm not sure what's gained by always saying no to this.

Why does it matter? Perhaps I wasn't sure if there would be a band and rolled for it. Perhaps the band is suffering from the plague that just hit town.

It really doesn't matter. The role of the player extends authority to their character, the DM's role to everything else.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

No.

But look at your phrase "anchoring information". The only way that the GM can guarantee the narration of anchoring information is if the game is a railroad. (The metaphors are mixed, but I think nevertheless clear enough.)

What the... No! I merely mean the general information regarding the thing. This has nothing to do with the railroads. Like with the bar I would expect roughly how many (if any) people there are to be a factor which significantly contributes to the atmosphere of the scene, and might be required for action declarations, but also is something that cannot really be consistently inferred from "there is a bar." Thus I feel it is the sort of information that should be included in the original description.

Another sort of thing I feel is good to include in initial description are the sort of things that might be otherwise incorrectly inferred from the context. For example if you don't want your players to imagine a king wearing this: , then you probably should describe their headgear or lack thereof.

Otherwise, there is always the possibility of the player treating something as salient that the GM didn't think of.

And it is this foundational possibility that I am drawing attention to.

Yes, the players can focus on stuff that was initially just background and bring it to the forefront and make it the focus of the action and attention. This to me seems rather obvious.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Is that because if there was a band or music you would have said so, therefore if you haven't said so it definitely doesn't exist (either because it's in your prep or because you've committed to a particular vision of the bar in your head already?

What if you simply didn't consider whether or not a band could be there? Does the player making the assumption there's a band and asking for a tune from them constitute such an overstep that you automatically say there isn't one? If the player asked instead, might the result be different?

It just seems to me that 'a band exists and is playing' is a very plausible assumption Yes there might be some bars where music is banned, or looked down on, etc. But generally if I was GMing, even in a very traditional game, I would think i) this is a very plausible assumption the player has made, maybe other players have also made it, and it will hurt their immersion to say no, and ii) the player quite likely has a cool moment or strategy they are hoping to set up here. I would either allow it or at the least I would assign it a % chance of the band existing.

I'm not sure what's gained by always saying no to this.

Yeah, if I had no particular conception regarding some minor detail, and what the player asks* or assumes fits the general vibe I'm going for then I might just as well roll with it.

And I am sure in practice in very game players infer some things that were not directly mentioned. But are sorta arguing about the scale of things that can be inferred. But these probably depend a lot on the each group's, and particularly on the GM's style. For example I think I am more verbose and detailed with my descriptions than a certain GM whose game I play in. So in my game there might be less that needs to be inferred. For example I feel that if there was band or a musician present in a bar, that is the sort of thing I would mention unprompted.

* And indeed similar thing happens with questions. LIke if the GM had not thought about the band or a musician, and the player asks "Is there a band?" then it might indeed make the GM decide that there is, thus the question effectively causing the band to materialise.