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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="P1NBACK" data-source="post: 5316484" data-attributes="member: 83768">Hey CovertOps, nice of you to join. I quit this thread earlier because people were ignoring my posts (but we've taken it up again in the "4E realism" thread... lol, so ... I may be going insane <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ) however, since you seem to be actually reading my posts and asking me questions, I'll respond to my best ability. I know the players aren't their characters. When I ask, "How do you do that?" I'm directing myself to the character, not the player. I often call my players by their character names. It's a habit. What I'm really asking is, "How does your character do that?" A player can justify their character's actions in any way they see fit. I just don't want to hear, "I use Thromgard's Spinning Assault." Or... Whatever. Why? For one, it doesn't do anything for me to note the effect and how it works. I don't have every power memorized, so I need to know as a DM what's happening in the fiction in order to respond correctly. Secondly, the circumstances will often depend on the fiction of how the actual mechanics are implemented in the game world. This is supremely important for skill checks (more so than combat attacks) and custom maneuvers (like you would adjudicate from page 42 of the DMG - which I suspect most of these "rules hardliners" have never and have no interest in using...). So, it's kind of important on a couple levels. Like I've said millions of times, I'm not going to disallow a power to function because of the "goodness" of the description. Just give me any description. Not at all. I'm saying, "If you want to use the Intimidate skill, have your character do something intimidating." That's about it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  There's no DM fiat here. There are mechanics and fiction coinciding. You can say, "I bluff him" all day. But, how do I know what the NPC says in response if you don't tell me what your character says? Does the player have to be convincing? Not at all. That's what the dice are for. But, does the player have to describe their character saying or doing something to invoke the mechanic? Of course! That's not DM fiat. That's called roleplaying. I never changed my tune, although I did try to clarify my position (and continue to do...). Many people, yourself included, have made rash conclusions based on my simple statement of "to do it mechanically, do it fictionally" - as if these mechanics aren't supposed to be adjudicating the fiction... What do you do if a player says, "I run up to him and sweep his legs from underneath him, tripping him!" You don't say, "Sorry! You can't do that! It's not a power you have!" You say, "Sure! Do you have a mechanical power that does that? If not, let's do a custom move using page 42! If so, roll the dice for me!" It's the opposite if someone says to me, "Hey, I use Lion's Tail Sweep." I say, "Awesome! How do you do that?" "I run up to him and sweep his legs from underneath him, tripping him!" Same thing. Sure. Of course different groups have varying levels of narrative in there. 4th Edition is definitely a "Step On Up" game, designed for player's to overcome challenges with their characters. That's a HUGE part of the game. However, you can play a board game with that effect too. To get it into that roleplaying territory, you need those extra bits of fiction and consequences.Yeah. See, that's where you're missing me. I agree with all of that. And, "I swing my sword" is fiction. "I use Twin Strike" is not. You feel me? On the one hand, you have the player describing a fictional action his character is taking. On the other, you have the player describing a power on his sheet. Know what I mean? "I swing both my swords at the kobold!" Fiction. "I use Twin Strike on the kobold!" Mechanic. I'd just rather hear "swing both my swords" than "twin strike". It means less work for me as a DM as I try to think up the responding description. I agree. Sometimes, you may just want to say, "Twin Strike!" and roll dice. I'd rather you say, "I drive both swords into him!" and roll dice. Obviously, it's up to the group preference. But, I don't think it's as evil as people are making it out to be to ask for some fiction. I don't classify myself. I strive for different creative agendas depending on the game I'm playing. If I'm doing 4E, I love gamist Step On Up play. If I'm doing Dogs in the Vineyard or Apocalypse World or Sorcerer, I love me some narrativist Story Now play. I don't think I've ever once played a "simulationist" game as far as I understand simulationist. However, in all those games, I'm interested in the fiction. Having one creative agenda doesn't mean you prefer fiction over the other.</blockquote>

Verification