All of that goes for me too,
@hawkeyefan .
Thanks for answering.
You had said earlier that a player doing this could "interfere" with something. What did you have in mind?
For my part, I feel that creating the world is my duty (and my joy) as a DM.
Sure, I'm just trying to find out what would be problematic for you about the kind of stuff we're talking about.
I've also never had a player that objected to that in principle. I have had players object to specific points of narration, and when that happens we discuss it. Sometimes my narrations stands, and sometimes I change it because the player made a good point or corrected an actual error on my part.
That's cool. As always, as long as everyone at the actual table is happy, then everything is all good.
I'm trying to focus less on what constitutes a preference, and get to the reasons for the preferences.
Like, I can elaborate on why I like to give players more leeway with this stuff. I can also explain why I used to have a more traditional mindset... but I don't want to assume anyone shares those reasons... they may be very different than mine.
Because it works for me and my groups.
Why?
I am genuinely asking. I'm curious why you prefer it that way beyond "because that's my preference" or "that's the default process per the book".
We're talking about different ways to play the game. So let's talk about them instead of just perceiving questions as attacks.
Because I've had a handful of players who, given the restrictions of D&D were fine but who I know would abuse the ability to add to the worlds fiction and D&D doesn't have the guardrails in place to counter that and I don't want to have to deal with it.
Okay... now this is like a tangible thing we can discuss. This seems to be a reason for your preference, which is what I'm interested in discussing. How would you expect players to abuse it? What are you concerned about?
Cool. I won't. But I now assume
@Lanefan was correct.
This seems like a reasonable response and not an agenda-driven one at all!
@Lanefan clearly knows more about Torchbearer than the guy who's written a 14-page actual play summary! Good call!
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.
I personally love it when players give me gifts like this. To me, this is very much an opportunity. An entire session (at least) could be based on this.
Intentionality! Autocorrect!
I don't know if railroading requires intentionality. I would describe my earliest DMing as railroading for sure... but that's because I didn't really know there was any other way.
I wasn't intending to limit anyone or to shut down player contribution... I just thought that's how the game had to work.
This is also why... when I see people say things like "this is how the game has to work" it resonates with me.
