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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7583236" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>(1) Not every rule is <em>GM</em>-gating.</p><p></p><p>(2) There is a very big difference, in the play of a game (including a RPG) between rules, and discretionary gating. To elide that difference is to elide much of what is interesting/significant in game design.</p><p></p><p>I actually just quoted you saying, of the bit about cooperation, that "The players working together just means that they shouldn't be jerks about ideas on what to do."</p><p></p><p>But now you're (i) saying that it is something else, and (ii) saying that that something else is wrong.</p><p></p><p>Also, your description of what the book says as "you can't use player knowledge if the PC does not know about that knowledge" is not very precise, and fails to identify the actual point at issue, which is <em>who gets to decide what a PC knows?</em> The RQ book actually says that "your first duty is to play within the limits of the characters you generate. Even though you are a chemistry major, for instance, your shepherd character cannot (without learning or training) stroll to a game world village and open an alchemy shop." This does not tell us how PC knowledge is established, although it makes it clear that PC background is relevant (eg shepherds typically don't know alchemy). Who gets to interpret and extrapolate from that background - player or GM - is left unstated, although the subsequent discussion of cooperation strongly implies that it is a mutual endeavour.</p><p></p><p>Your view that the GM has sole and overwhelming authority in this respect, which - as best I can tell - extends to vast swathes of setting information also, (i) as a matter of practice will tend to produce pawn stance play (as I suggested not far upthread in reply to [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION]), and (ii) is a very strong form of GM-gating.</p><p></p><p>I am currently GMing a game (Classic Traveller) in which players are expected to conform their action declarations, in part, to their PCs Intelligence and Education ratings. We have one PC with an INT of 2 (on a 1 to 15 scale, with 7 being typical). That is certainly an important factor in action declaration for that PC, but my table would regard as laughable the idea that it's a matter solely, or even primarily, for GM adjudication.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7583236, member: 42582"] (1) Not every rule is [I]GM[/I]-gating. (2) There is a very big difference, in the play of a game (including a RPG) between rules, and discretionary gating. To elide that difference is to elide much of what is interesting/significant in game design. I actually just quoted you saying, of the bit about cooperation, that "The players working together just means that they shouldn't be jerks about ideas on what to do." But now you're (i) saying that it is something else, and (ii) saying that that something else is wrong. Also, your description of what the book says as "you can't use player knowledge if the PC does not know about that knowledge" is not very precise, and fails to identify the actual point at issue, which is [I]who gets to decide what a PC knows?[/I] The RQ book actually says that "your first duty is to play within the limits of the characters you generate. Even though you are a chemistry major, for instance, your shepherd character cannot (without learning or training) stroll to a game world village and open an alchemy shop." This does not tell us how PC knowledge is established, although it makes it clear that PC background is relevant (eg shepherds typically don't know alchemy). Who gets to interpret and extrapolate from that background - player or GM - is left unstated, although the subsequent discussion of cooperation strongly implies that it is a mutual endeavour. Your view that the GM has sole and overwhelming authority in this respect, which - as best I can tell - extends to vast swathes of setting information also, (i) as a matter of practice will tend to produce pawn stance play (as I suggested not far upthread in reply to [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION]), and (ii) is a very strong form of GM-gating. I am currently GMing a game (Classic Traveller) in which players are expected to conform their action declarations, in part, to their PCs Intelligence and Education ratings. We have one PC with an INT of 2 (on a 1 to 15 scale, with 7 being typical). That is certainly an important factor in action declaration for that PC, but my table would regard as laughable the idea that it's a matter solely, or even primarily, for GM adjudication. [/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