Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
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="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7582046" data-attributes="member: 29398"><p>Of course. </p><p></p><p>But let's add a few more variables, shall we? Let's say F fiction was established at time 1, and X is being introduced somewhat later at time 2; and the fiction that came between these events is, in sum total, FF. </p><p></p><p>Back at 1, F was established using the known information at the time - information of which X would have been a part had it been introduced at or before 1; and from there FF proceeded.</p><p></p><p>Now we get to 2, and X is introduced. And while you can come up with many versions of R that maintain FF, my contention is that had X been known at 1 then the resulting fiction could just as easily have been GG or HH or II or JJ by now - all different fictions that are not FF that could have happened but did not because X wasn't known about. This calls all of FF into question, and in the worst case renders it completely invalid.</p><p></p><p>We don't already know that one or more Ns are not valid candidates - just because they weren't what was played out doesn't invalidate them - and had X been known back at time 1 then who knows where the fiction might have gone. It might have stayed true to FF, for all we know - but the very fact that it might not have is what calls it into question.</p><p></p><p>Put another way, introducing X now in effect retcons X as having been present all along; meaning the fiction needs to also be retconned in order to account for the presnece of X the entire time. And as retcons are bad, the simplest way to prevent this is to veto X on the spot.</p><p></p><p>Yeah, the whole bit about where do they come from, how come there's a seemingly infinite supply of them, why don't they beat each other up more often when of clearly opposed types, and all that. Never been a fan of it, paticularly in a closed dungeon setting.</p><p></p><p>Some module authors are wise enough to give the DM a total for each wandering monster type (and sometimes they even note where they'll be found if not met wandering) which then gets counted down by the DM as the PCs knock them off, until none are left. This is an excellent start; now all I have to consider is whether the different types of wandering monsters will get along. (e.g. what are the odds of the 2d4 wandering guards [based in room 14] getting in a fight with the 1d3 wandering giant ants [from the nest in cave 23] should they ever happen to meet; and how many of each would survive?)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7582046, member: 29398"] Of course. But let's add a few more variables, shall we? Let's say F fiction was established at time 1, and X is being introduced somewhat later at time 2; and the fiction that came between these events is, in sum total, FF. Back at 1, F was established using the known information at the time - information of which X would have been a part had it been introduced at or before 1; and from there FF proceeded. Now we get to 2, and X is introduced. And while you can come up with many versions of R that maintain FF, my contention is that had X been known at 1 then the resulting fiction could just as easily have been GG or HH or II or JJ by now - all different fictions that are not FF that could have happened but did not because X wasn't known about. This calls all of FF into question, and in the worst case renders it completely invalid. We don't already know that one or more Ns are not valid candidates - just because they weren't what was played out doesn't invalidate them - and had X been known back at time 1 then who knows where the fiction might have gone. It might have stayed true to FF, for all we know - but the very fact that it might not have is what calls it into question. Put another way, introducing X now in effect retcons X as having been present all along; meaning the fiction needs to also be retconned in order to account for the presnece of X the entire time. And as retcons are bad, the simplest way to prevent this is to veto X on the spot. Yeah, the whole bit about where do they come from, how come there's a seemingly infinite supply of them, why don't they beat each other up more often when of clearly opposed types, and all that. Never been a fan of it, paticularly in a closed dungeon setting. Some module authors are wise enough to give the DM a total for each wandering monster type (and sometimes they even note where they'll be found if not met wandering) which then gets counted down by the DM as the PCs knock them off, until none are left. This is an excellent start; now all I have to consider is whether the different types of wandering monsters will get along. (e.g. what are the odds of the 2d4 wandering guards [based in room 14] getting in a fight with the 1d3 wandering giant ants [from the nest in cave 23] should they ever happen to meet; and how many of each would survive?) [/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