Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8154981" data-attributes="member: 16814">I don't know what you're imagining, but it doesn't look like anything I've been talking about.&nbsp; You're imagining bad faith -- that a player wants to manipulate or abuse the game is some way.&nbsp; This is saying that dealing with jerks is the system's problem, and that's just silly.&nbsp; If the player wants to abuse the game, this is a problem in any system.&nbsp; In fact, the behavior you're citing here is only one you are pointing out because the default response in a D&amp;D game is for the GM to use the system to handle it -- by saying no.&nbsp; You're citing the GM's authority to curtail agency as a primary way to deal with jerk players trying to manipulate the system in some way.&nbsp; A system, by the way, that makes this amazingly obvious to all of the other players rather than leave it up to the GM to nope.As for gamestate, I agree 100% that &quot;Elf is sad,&quot; and, &quot;door is locked,&quot; are both equally valid gamestates.&nbsp; I invite you, once again, to reconcile this with whatever you imagine I think.&nbsp; I'll provide a hint:&nbsp; &quot;elf is sad,&quot; requires exactly as much in-character action as &quot;door is locked&quot; -- which is to say none.&nbsp; You do, in D&amp;D, usually have the agency to declare your elf is sad, but in-character acting is orthogonal to this, not an enabler.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8154981, member: 16814"] I don't know what you're imagining, but it doesn't look like anything I've been talking about. You're imagining bad faith -- that a player wants to manipulate or abuse the game is some way. This is saying that dealing with jerks is the system's problem, and that's just silly. If the player wants to abuse the game, this is a problem in any system. In fact, the behavior you're citing here is only one you are pointing out because the default response in a D&D game is for the GM to use the system to handle it -- by saying no. You're citing the GM's authority to curtail agency as a primary way to deal with jerk players trying to manipulate the system in some way. A system, by the way, that makes this amazingly obvious to all of the other players rather than leave it up to the GM to nope. As for gamestate, I agree 100% that "Elf is sad," and, "door is locked," are both equally valid gamestates. I invite you, once again, to reconcile this with whatever you imagine I think. I'll provide a hint: "elf is sad," requires exactly as much in-character action as "door is locked" -- which is to say none. You do, in D&D, usually have the agency to declare your elf is sad, but in-character acting is orthogonal to this, not an enabler. [/QUOTE]

Verification