Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8146071" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, I would argue that the whole POINT of playing an RPG is to get to interesting situations and avoid boring uninteresting ones. I see this 'GM decision' as being akin to not worrying about some door into an uninteresting empty room. Sure, you can play that sucker out, but why? At some point you'll get back to the interesting stuff (in this case the fictional state will be different). The thing is I don't value any PARTICULAR fictional state. I value what the process is, was it fun? Was it interesting? Did it lead to play which illuminated some dramatic conflict? At some point all paths will presumably lead to that if you follow an agenda and process which leads there. So, not dicing for some situation which nobody at the table thinks leads to what they are interested in RPing just seems like basic good practice. I don't even see it as GM fiat, because the player could have just as easily pushed the issue of who believed what. I mean, Traveler is a bit of a loose game in terms of telling you that players can just go ahead and make a check to enact their intent, but I expect that [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] wouldn't tell the player to take a hike if he invoked a Diplomacy check or something instead of just letting the situation ride.I am also of the school of thought that the world is a lot more complex than people give credit for, and our understanding of social situations and personalities is a lot less than what is commonly understood. So I am dubious of anyone's ability to reason out what people might do, or what the probabilities are. I mean, we do some of this every day in real life, but mostly by following very set routine rules that tell us how to act. This works, but in really "out there" situations it is pretty famously impossible to tell what will happen. Perhaps Lady Askol is invested enough in her ideas about her lover that she's NEVER going to doubt until a cluebat hits her full in the face. This is as plausible as any other position we can take. Admittedly, that too is an assumption, your point is not invalid, it is just not somehow set in stone. Reasonable people can tell a few different stories here. Heck, since no check has been made, her belief is not actually something the player can count on. Evil GM Pemerton is perfectly within his rights to decide later that she's faking! (well, I'll let him say if he thinks that would be undermining the accomplishment of an earlier success).There are a lot of interesting aspects of this kind of 'fiction first, zero-myth, play to see what happens' process. It isn't just "everyone imagine what they want."</blockquote>

Verification