Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 7568760" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>I would argue this is a problem on your end, not on the end of people with this expectation (if only because I've played in enough games like this, and seen enough players with these expectations, to know it is a thing). That said, no one has argued for full realism. People have basically been arguing mainly for plausibility and a sense that the world is real. Pemerton created a straw man of that position in the OP (where a sentiment as'like it does in the real world' is taken to mean 'exactly the same as real life'). Further, I've actually been arguing for having more than one thing guide the GM determination of outcome (plausibility is important, but you can also include things like drama, excitement. etc in the decision making process). What people are saying isn't they want the GM to be a physics engine. They are saying they want the GM to create a setting that feels external to their character, consistent and real enough for the purposes of play. Those are not difficult things to achieve. Obviously people can nitpick all they want. If a player is intent on not believing the setting, the player won't believe the setting. But the people on this thread are not setting the high benchmark for realism that the Pemerton set at the start of the thread. And, more importantly, this whole conversation wasn't even about realism at all. It was about Pemerton saying that the GM making the determination "Bone Breaking Sect is/is not present" by simply deciding based on what he or she thinks ought to be, is Mother May I play. I said it was no more mother may I than real life. My point was, it wouldn't be mother may I unless the GM was forcing the players to keep asking about locations until they got the one that the GM had originally decided was the right one. But in my scenario, the GM is genuinely considering whether they would be at the tea house or not in good faith. That isn't mother may I. And this whole thread is just a straw man against that response where Pemerton was trying to rope people into defending the very strange position that game settings operate on the same causal principles as reality (which they obviously don't). That doesn't mean the situation is mother may I, nor does it mean settings can't feel like real places to people (or that GMs can't try to use plausibility in their determinations).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 7568760, member: 85555"] I would argue this is a problem on your end, not on the end of people with this expectation (if only because I've played in enough games like this, and seen enough players with these expectations, to know it is a thing). That said, no one has argued for full realism. People have basically been arguing mainly for plausibility and a sense that the world is real. Pemerton created a straw man of that position in the OP (where a sentiment as'like it does in the real world' is taken to mean 'exactly the same as real life'). Further, I've actually been arguing for having more than one thing guide the GM determination of outcome (plausibility is important, but you can also include things like drama, excitement. etc in the decision making process). What people are saying isn't they want the GM to be a physics engine. They are saying they want the GM to create a setting that feels external to their character, consistent and real enough for the purposes of play. Those are not difficult things to achieve. Obviously people can nitpick all they want. If a player is intent on not believing the setting, the player won't believe the setting. But the people on this thread are not setting the high benchmark for realism that the Pemerton set at the start of the thread. And, more importantly, this whole conversation wasn't even about realism at all. It was about Pemerton saying that the GM making the determination "Bone Breaking Sect is/is not present" by simply deciding based on what he or she thinks ought to be, is Mother May I play. I said it was no more mother may I than real life. My point was, it wouldn't be mother may I unless the GM was forcing the players to keep asking about locations until they got the one that the GM had originally decided was the right one. But in my scenario, the GM is genuinely considering whether they would be at the tea house or not in good faith. That isn't mother may I. And this whole thread is just a straw man against that response where Pemerton was trying to rope people into defending the very strange position that game settings operate on the same causal principles as reality (which they obviously don't). That doesn't mean the situation is mother may I, nor does it mean settings can't feel like real places to people (or that GMs can't try to use plausibility in their determinations). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top