Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6352156" data-attributes="member: 42582">Quite. Maybe the wolf grows so the druid can ride it. Maybe the druid shrinks when s/he sits on the wolf.I mean, it's not as if we insist on very accurate physics when we have halflings on riding dogs: the idea that dogs will serve as riding animals on a par with a horse or pony is itself rather implausible.I agree with Hussar completely on this. The idea that GMs have some sort of insight or maturity that players lack is ridiculous.There are good game-design reasons to remove players from certain aspects of adjudication in respect of the actions they declare for their PCs. Because in respect of that adjudication, players have a conflict of interest.In my view, much of what Gygax has to say in his DMG about GM authority is dealing precisely with such adjudication issues: he is emphasising the role of the GM in adjudicating fictional positioning, and its implications for action resolution. (He doesn't use quite that terminology, because the terminology hadn't been invented yet, but the I regard the ideas as fairly clear.)But there is no general reason to subordinate the judgements and contributions of players to those of the GM.Agreed. Completely agreed.I don't disagree that there is a clear historical explanation for why Gygax wrote the advice that he did. But that still doesn't make it good advice.</blockquote>