D&D 5E (2014) DM imposed restrictions to the game (+)

[Mannahnin]

You'd think, but I'll just point around to the edition flame wars.

Yes, a huge amount of the edition wars is people identifying strongly with an object/particular version of a game, and taking criticism of that game as a personal attack.

A few folks are still carrying around those grievances and reactively picking fights at the smallest provocation. Or something even vaguely resembling one.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yes but it’s also implicitly personal when your criticism starts challenging their personal judgment. That’s what I’m pointing toward.

I'm just saying that just because something isn't aiming toward picking a fight as strongly doesn't mean it isn't still doing that.

 

[Mannahnin]

I'm just saying that just because something isn't aiming toward picking a fight as strongly doesn't mean it isn't still doing that.

Sure, absolutely. While deriding a game and deriding a person are categorically different, gratuitously insulting a game can certainly amount to trolling.

 

[tetrasodium]

You could posit that. Baselessly, but you could. It doesn't however change the fact that according to the rules those skills are not used on the PCs, so these things cannot mechnically affect them by RAW.

Nice way of clearly demonstrating how empty words like

Spoiler: these empty words

when paired with over a decade of refusing to support GM's with tools for that in favor of endlessly encouraging players to taker that quoted stance you just demonstrated (again) to shut down any of that abhorrent rule breaking as you did when declaring that the player is free to ignore influence on their PC from the world but things change if it's sufficiently defined magical influence the player is made aware of with enough mechanical detail for their personal choice.

Definition of supernatural: "of, relating to, or being above or beyond what is natural"

Therefore anything that breaks the rules of our reality is by that definition supernatural. Dragons are supernatural creatures, as are giants, ghosts and on and on.

Other things don't work exactly like the real world game but that's because of modelling simplification and gameplay considerations which would include things like HP.

This is incorrect. Context of a word matters with definitions, even dictionaries often have multiple contextually dependent definitions for words. In the case of those game terms they are even more specific & one would need to use the game rules where they are defined. This kind of munging of game rules via non-game sources can

Although those those terms are defined in a relevant sections they are also found

Spoiler: pg180 Special abilities

SPECIAL ABILITIES
Medusas, dryads, harpies, and other magical creatures can create
magical effects without being spellcasters. Characters using magic
wands, rods, and other enchanted items, as well as certain class
features, can also create magical effects. These effects come in two
types: spell-like and supernatural. Additionally, members of certain
classes and certain creatures can use special abilities that aren’t
magical. These abilities are called extraordinary or natural.
Spell-Like Abilities: A dryad’s charm person effect and the greater
teleport ability of many devils are spell-like abilities Usually, a spell-
like ability works just like the spell of that name. A few spell-like
abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are
described.
A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component,
nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost. The user activates it
mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the
ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component. A spell-
like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted
otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-
like ability functions just like a spell.
Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and to being dis-
pelled by dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is
suppressed or negated, such as an antimagic field. Spell-like abilities
cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.
Some creatures are actually sorcerers of a sort. They cast arcane
spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. In fact, an
individual creature (such as some dragons) could have some spell-
like abilities and also cast other spells as a sorcerer.
Supernatural Abilities: A dragon’s fiery breath, a medusa’s pet-
rifying gaze, a spectre’s energy drain, and a cleric’s use of positive or
negative energy to turn or rebuke undead are supernatural abilities
These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they
generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Supernatural
abilities are not subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or to being
dispelled by dispel magic, and do not function in areas where magic is
suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field).
Extraordinary Abilities: A rogue’s evasion ability and a troll’s
ability to regenerate are extraordinary abilities. These abilities
cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do
not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or
disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not
subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic
field. Indeed, extraordinary abilities do not qualify as magical,
though they may break the laws of physics.
Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has
because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural
abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary,
supernatural, or spell-like.

Glossary entries

Spoiler: 308 Extraordinary Ability

extraordinary ability (Ex): A nonmagical special ability (as
opposed to a spell-like or supernatural ability).

Spoiler: 310 Natural Abilities

natural ability: A nonmagical capability, such as walking,
swimming (for aquatic creatures), and flight (for winged creatures).

Spoiler: 313 Spell-Like Ability

spell-like ability (Sp): A special ability with effects that resemble
those of a spell. In most cases, a spell-like ability works just like the
spell of the same name.

Spoiler: phb314 Supernatural Ability

supernatural ability (Su): A magical power that produces a
particular effect, as opposed to a natural, extraordinary, or spell-like
ability. Using a supernatural ability generally does not provoke an
attack or opportunity. Supernatural abilities are not subject to
dispelling, disruption or spell resistance. However, they do not
function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated, such as
inside an antimagic field.

 

[tetrasodium]

So it's perfection or nothing? Occasionally I am getting as close to thinking as my character as is practical, so similar to when I'm really engrossed in a book for example. Is it perfect? Do I get to the point of actually believing I am my character? Of course not. But when I'm really into playing a character I sometimes surprise myself a little bit by what I say but it's also exactly how my character would react.

I would imagine that the answer is yes of course because the player expectation sets the bar at one where the player has exclusive unilateral authority that the GM is expected to treat as unquestionable perfection

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Nice way of clearly demonstrating how empty words like

Spoiler: these empty words

View attachment 436454

when paired with over a decade of refusing to support GM's with tools for that in favor of endlessly encouraging players to taker that quoted stance you just demonstrated (again) to shut down any of that abhorrent rule breaking as you did when declaring that the player is free to ignore influence on their PC from the world but things change if it's sufficiently defined magical influence the player is made aware of with enough mechanical detail for their personal choice.

I stated what the RAW is. I fully support the GM's right to houserule their game however they see fit. So if a GM wants to houserule the game so that they can use the NPC social skills to railroad the players, that is their right. They just need to tell me beforehand so I know not to participate the game.

 

[tetrasodium]

I stated what the RAW is. I fully support the GM's right to houserule their game however they see fit. So if a GM wants to houserule the game so that they can use the NPC social skills to railroad the players, that is their right. They just need to tell me beforehand so I know not to participate the game.

No. Players do not have that veto authority over the GMs ability to engage in "rulings not rules". Since nobody invited anyone to a game in this thread it's not particularly relevant if you would play such a game when you feel empowered to veto the very idea of such a ruling in a game where you are not even invited.

Also while you are at doubling down on RAW, point out where in the rules that players are given the authority for them to demand to know if something is magic without their pc needing to do any investigation so the player can decide if an affect on their PC is something they are maybe not free to ignore should feel like ignoring the world's affect on their PC.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

No. Players do not have that veto authority over the GMs ability to engage in "rulings not rules".

They have the ability to leave the game.

Since nobody invited anyone to a game in this thread it's not particularly relevant if you would play such a game when you feel empowered to veto the very idea of such a ruling in a game where you are not even invited.

It is not a veto. If there are enough players to play with such a houserule, then then game obviously goes on without a problem. But I definitely think that it is good practice to inform the participants about major houserules beforehand.

Also while you are at doubling down on RAW, point out where in the rules that players are given the authority for them to demand to know if something is magic without their pc needing to do any investigation so the player can decide if an affect on their PC is something they are maybe not free to ignore should feel like ignoring the world's affect on their PC.

No, and of course GM can always invent some sort of Thermian justification fro their BS. But it really doesn't change the fact that if it is repeatedly done it will erode player agency and is railroading, especially if this was not something the players agreed to beforehand.

 

[Lanefan]

So can I ask why that's important?

Most RPG players are not trained actors, but I don't feel that being a good actor is a requirement for role play.

That, and as time goes on it makes sense that a player will slowly - and maybe not even intentionally - acquire at least a bit of skill at improvisation simply through repeated practice while roleplaying their character(s).

Unless your filming an episode of Critical Role, no one is going to give a fig about how good your accent is, how well you embodied the spirit of a 300 year old elf, or if you can actually understand and react naturally to the vision of Great Cthulhu rising from the sea.

Never mind that shows like Critical Role, being done by professionals, kind of exposes the rest of us for the amateurs we are; which IMO is a serious negative outcome of those shows.

 

[Lanefan]

I stated what the RAW is. I fully support the GM's right to houserule their game however they see fit. So if a GM wants to houserule the game so that they can use the NPC social skills to railroad the players, that is their right. They just need to tell me beforehand so I know not to participate the game.

If the DM tells me that such a ruling is being made in the name of PC-NPC symmetry with the intent that those social mechanics work the same no matter who in the setting is using them, I'd go along with it for that reason alone; and I say this as someone strongly in favour of player agency.

A far better way of achieving the same end, though, would be for the DM to just strip social-skill mechanics away from PCs. If the NPCs can't railroad you, why should you be able to railroad them?