Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 7582665" data-attributes="member: 6688277">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=42582" target="_blank">pemerton</a>, @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6785785" target="_blank">hawkeyefan</a> and @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=5142" target="_blank">Aldarc</a>:  @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=23751" target="_blank">Maxperson</a>'s game (and he can correct me where I'm wrong) advocates for actor stance, not necessarily for first person dialogue but for the character behaviour/thought process. So yes at times, probably many, the player will know more than the character about the in-game fiction, as the player dives into the role of the character. Added to the above, at Maxperson's table the players may not create backstory fiction on the fly as that could be seen to circumvent much of the player knowledge-character knowledge divide and allows one short cuts/maybe even considered as a cheat in the roleplay (actor stance).From Maxperson's PoV, he is not gating anything or playing a degenerate form of MMI. He, as referee, is ensuring that everyone follows the roleplay in actor stance. Hence metagaming is an abomination in his eyes as is the circumventing of any kind of actor stance by players inputting backstory fiction or any in-game fiction which could viewed as a cheat.You and others (the collective you) may of course consider the above weird, a pc disconnect, MMI, DM-gating - but I think your efforts here are pointless in trying to convince Maxperson to agree with your definitions of his game as actor stance is his pure way of D&D and therefore cannot be weird, disconnected, or deemed some type of pejorative since from his PoV he is following the rules and adjudicating fairly according to his table.In a rather crude sense (maybe skirting close against board rules), and meaning no disrespect to Maxperson or yourselves via this example, you guys sound like a bunch of atheists trying to convince a religious people that the way they live their life is weird, they have a disconnect from reality, have an MMI relationship with their pastor/deity and their lifestyle equates to a whole slew of pejoratives. And then you question why they don't want to see it your way and accept your definitions. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Meanwhile according to them they're following the good book and living life correctly.</blockquote>

Verification