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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CovertOps" data-source="post: 5316195" data-attributes="member: 65152">I'm coming a bit late to this and DS has said just about everything I would say other than this (which may have also been said and I missed it):  The players are NOT their characters.  Characters have abilities and skills that the players do not have and the reverse is also likely true that the players have skills and knowledge that the character does not have.  What you are doing here is asking the "player" to justify something that the "character" can do according to the games "rules".  Your phrasing here is basically "If you can't justify your characters abilities to my satisfaction within the fiction of the world then I am nerfing your character and ruling that your "characters" ability doesn't work.  While this may satisfy your need for "the fiction" (or whatever word/description you prefer here) it is a horrible use of DM fiat at the table and on the fly.  Later in the thread you changed your tune somewhat, but understand that this here is why so many came down on you so hard.I like to think of "The Karate Kid" when I think of martial encounter powers.  His use of "Crane Technique" in the final fight to win the match is something he could not have done more than once <s>to a given opponent</s> in a given fight because they would be looking for it from then on.  I agree with you that I have a harder time with Martial Dailies.  The real issue is that the people who seem to be irritated by this the most are prior 3.x players.  I demand that my game is fun and everything else sort of takes a back seat.  Trying to explain game mechanics is lowest on the list, because as a player I know why they are there.  If I can't accept a few outlier rules (like dailies) and gloss over them I'll play something different or if we really like everything else we'll try to house rule.  Ad lib DM fiat is a bad way to run a game.I think that what you're talking about varies from group to group.  Some groups (like mine) are more like roleplay, combat, roleplay, combat.  The combat isn't really role playing, but it does have an effect on "the fiction" or as some might say "the narrative".  It's part of a bigger picture where the party might be trying to save the princess from the local band of goblins.  I could probably invent a bunch of fictional story around this like how you met the prince or that the goblins are really working for the evil duke or other stuff like that and  how all the parties actions have "consequences" in "the fiction".  I'm not as concerned with "how did you swing your sword" as I am with "now that the goblins are dead you've garnered the (secret) hatred of the duke and a new BBEG.Having re-read that a couple times I think what I'm getting at is at what "level" do you want your "fiction" to be?  Do you want the party to explain every sword thrust or spell they cast (that's not as interesting to me) or do you want to know what groups they pissed off when they killed the duke?If I was to guess I'd say you're more simulationist in your leanings and I'm pretty sure I'm a mix of gamist/narrativist.</blockquote>

Verification