Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8954907" data-attributes="member: 7006">Learn what?  What exactly are they learning?You had mentioned this before in an earlier post that one needs to run the game in a certain way so that the players can learn from what happened.  Learn from their successes and their mistakes I guess?  I never got a chance to respond then, but because it's now come up again I'll ask it now instead... what are the player learning that it's so important that they do?  I honestly do not know what you are referring to.  What are they supposed to be learning, what does it matter if they are or aren't, and ultimately what is the purpose to "learning" something about the game other than just playing it?I'm actually curious what it is that you think is important for players to learn that all dice rolls have to be on the "up and up"?  Because the things I can think of end up falling into a couple different categories-- none of which have anything to do with dice fudging or are for a part of the game that I do not find to be important enough that "learning" it is worthwhile.  So for instance:- Do players need to learn how to play the game?Yes.  Sure.  I can buy that statement.  Why?  Because I presume by learning the game rules all the players can "play faster", which speeds up the number of encounters and events the group can do, and that presumably is more fun for all players at the table.  And maximizing people's fun is a good thing.  I would 100% agree with that take.  The only problem being that I do not believe a DM fudging a roll has anything to do with how fast a player can learn the rules of the game, so I don't think that is what you are talking about.- Do players need to learn to trust their DM?At some point, sure.  I'll give you that.  I'm sure that's a big thing for a lot of tables... especially for all those players who don't have set groups and are constantly joining or running pick-up games.  Learning how the DM will run the game gives a person a better chance of knowing they will probably enjoy their time playing with them.  And as people's time is precious, I do not discount wanting to learn that info and that they can trust that unknown DM as quickly as possible.  But... for all the tables that are already established and for which there is already a built-in trust... those DMs that know their players and know what those players are okay with, and the players know the DM and what the DM's ultimate focus is on that they are agree to and believe in... those DM can do whatever they want if they stay within those parameters.  Which means a universal "all fudging is bad" quite possibly does not apply to those tables.  Which means we now move to a middle ground in the discussion and not remain out on the extreme all-or-nothing opinion of the matter.  Some tables can be fine with fudging, even if a lot of tables aren't.- Do players need to learn "tactics" on how best to defeat the monsters and encounters in the game?No.  I don't think they do.  Because learning how to "best defeat monsters" means that the purpose of fighting those monsters is to "win".  The fastest way to do it.  The way that results in the least amount of damage taken.  Figuring out the "rules" of a monster or encounter and then blazing through it with the most effective strategy that causes the least amount of issue.  But all of that brings us back to the whole thing about treating D&D as nothing but a board game-- where learning how to "win" each fight ids the reason for doing it and trumps the narrative and story of the fight itself... the reason for the fight, the actions of the fight, and what happens to the characters after the fight.  Players don't need to "learn how best to defeat" monsters... because winning or losing against them shouldn't matter to the players.  What matters is the story the characters go through due to the fight, and how they are changed by the fight after it.  Characters can learn as much from a loss as they can a win.  So as long as A result occurs after a fight (whatever that result is and however the DM and players got there)... the players can roleplay their characters after the fact and the story of their character will progress.  Players can just blindly stumble through a fight or series of encounters with no thought or learning whatsoever and come out the other side having their characters having been successful... and there's nothing wrong with that one bit.Is there something else that you think players are meant to "learn" that can ONLY happen if the DM is completely up front about the results of every die roll?  I'm sure it's possible I might be missing something else, so please feel free to pass on what you think those are if you believe it's important and you wish to continue the discussion.  You don't have to, obviously... because I don't think either of us are going to change our minds so this is all just talking about D&D stuff because like talking about D&D stuff.  But that's never stopped me from doing it here on EN World all the time, so I'm more than happy to read your further comments on this if you wish to discuss them.</blockquote>

Verification