Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3399695" data-attributes="member: 4937">I feel that in your rush to create a straw man out of what I wrote, that you've totally missed the point.&nbsp; I'm not looking for a particular verb.&nbsp; The great advantage of playing with a DM is that I can judge the players intentions.&nbsp; &quot;Search painting&quot; works just as well as &quot;Move painting&quot; or &quot;Look behind painting&quot; or any other thing that says the player's intention is to investigate in and around the painting.&nbsp; But that isn't the point.&nbsp; The point is that, &quot;Move painting&quot; still works just as well as &quot;I take 20 and search the whole room.&quot; and the two things are not in fact equivalent in anything but thier outcome with respect to looking behind the painting.&nbsp; One is explicit and the other is implicit.&nbsp; One is a one round action motivated probably by the player's knowledge that under certain story conventions, things are hidden behind paintings, or by prioritizing those things in the room's desciption which are interesting, while the other might take a half-hour or more and is almost algorithmic in its approach to the problem.&nbsp; If the straw man characterization of the DM that perfers a more 'Move painting' approach is that the DM is acting like a computer, then the straw man characterization of the 'Take 20 and search room' approach is that the player is acting like a computer - the interface has been reduced in complexity down to a level you could program for.&nbsp; If that approach works, a decent expert system ought to substitute for a group of players just fine.This works both ways you know.&nbsp; I could just as easily say, &quot;If the players are flexible, creative, and able to adapt to the challenges on the fly, as necessary, as they are presented with next hints or added complications, then the DM will not feel frustrated.&nbsp; However, if the players have only one solution in mind, or are otherwise rigid and inflexible...&quot;I believe that that is my point exactly.&nbsp; As a player I get frustrated with command-driven or menu-driven RPG's because of thier inherit limitations.&nbsp; You can imagine how much more frustrated I get with players demanding that I be a command-driven or menu-driven interface.Indeed.I suggest you look over what I said again.&nbsp; And consider again just how many problems there are between 'take 20 and search' and 'move painting'.&nbsp; Imagine for example a highly cluttered room (say an attic or a storage room), in which something is hidden in a concealed panel.&nbsp; Does 'take 20' mean that the players examined everything closely and methodically, a process which might fail if noone has more than say 5 or 10 ranks in search.&nbsp; Or does 'take 20' mean, &quot;We take the time and effort remove everything from the room and strip the wallpaper from the walls...&quot;&nbsp; I would say the former.&nbsp; Players will - if they think it matters - tend to argue post facto for the latter, right up until what they find is a symbol of death, in which case they argue post facto for the former.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3399695, member: 4937"] I feel that in your rush to create a straw man out of what I wrote, that you've totally missed the point. I'm not looking for a particular verb. The great advantage of playing with a DM is that I can judge the players intentions. "Search painting" works just as well as "Move painting" or "Look behind painting" or any other thing that says the player's intention is to investigate in and around the painting. But that isn't the point. The point is that, "Move painting" still works just as well as "I take 20 and search the whole room." and the two things are not in fact equivalent in anything but thier outcome with respect to looking behind the painting. One is explicit and the other is implicit. One is a one round action motivated probably by the player's knowledge that under certain story conventions, things are hidden behind paintings, or by prioritizing those things in the room's desciption which are interesting, while the other might take a half-hour or more and is almost algorithmic in its approach to the problem. If the straw man characterization of the DM that perfers a more 'Move painting' approach is that the DM is acting like a computer, then the straw man characterization of the 'Take 20 and search room' approach is that the player is acting like a computer - the interface has been reduced in complexity down to a level you could program for. If that approach works, a decent expert system ought to substitute for a group of players just fine. This works both ways you know. I could just as easily say, "If the players are flexible, creative, and able to adapt to the challenges on the fly, as necessary, as they are presented with next hints or added complications, then the DM will not feel frustrated. However, if the players have only one solution in mind, or are otherwise rigid and inflexible..." I believe that that is my point exactly. As a player I get frustrated with command-driven or menu-driven RPG's because of thier inherit limitations. You can imagine how much more frustrated I get with players demanding that I be a command-driven or menu-driven interface. Indeed. I suggest you look over what I said again. And consider again just how many problems there are between 'take 20 and search' and 'move painting'. Imagine for example a highly cluttered room (say an attic or a storage room), in which something is hidden in a concealed panel. Does 'take 20' mean that the players examined everything closely and methodically, a process which might fail if noone has more than say 5 or 10 ranks in search. Or does 'take 20' mean, "We take the time and effort remove everything from the room and strip the wallpaper from the walls..." I would say the former. Players will - if they think it matters - tend to argue post facto for the latter, right up until what they find is a symbol of death, in which case they argue post facto for the former. [/QUOTE]

Verification