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

[AlViking]

The "idea" came from your own post where you repeatedly mentioned it and drew a line based on you personally knowing why the gm is telling you that the "normal dog" is affecting your PC. Here it is again without the quote tags
"If a DM asks me to make a Wisdom saving throw I'm going to assume there's some supernatural effect. If they tell me that I have to make the saving throw because in my background I was once scared of a dog and Fido, a totally normal dog, just came around the corner I'm going to disagree with the call. On the other hand if Fido is really a Yeth Hound and just used their Baleful Howl ability it's fine because they are baying magically. On the other hand if a Tarrasque walks around the corner my character might be turning tale and running"

Also why is it that all of these posts espousing depth of roleplay and absolute author level player control over a PC seem to think that the only way the world could possibly affect a PC is through fear? The ways that someone could be directly or incorrectly affected by the world or something on it are endless awe alarm shock disgust sorrow rage/anger doubt/certainty respect for deeds/social standing/position organizational backing/etc. the list is absolutely endless.


The fact that the GM is telling you that a "normal dog coming around the corner is affecting your PC in ways that seem odd for the apparent situation should be a strong reason to take action and use skills to look into understanding why... Demanding the option to nosell that based on being in the "mood' to be affected or knowing that it's obviously overly magical sidesteps the need to actually play the game and make actions that might put your PC at risk of unknown consequences or have a chance of it being a thing your PC is bad at in ways that result in leaning on other PCs who may be better skilled at those things... Demanding the answer has zero risk for The Star PC at the table and wotc has even in helped me ensure that the only person who could look unreasonable is the gm who shuts down that unreasonable player demand for both absolute control and on demand metaknowledge

I don't want the DM telling me what my character thinks or feels unless there is a magical or supernatural effect cause. Nothing in D&D 5e indicates that the DM can or should tell a player what they think or feel. According to the rules of 5e a player may be asked by the DM to make a persuasion or intimidation check to determine an NPC's reaction if the DM chooses, it does not automatically succeed or fail.

That's it. Play how you want but no matter how many times you ask my answer isn't changing.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I don't want the DM telling me what my character thinks or feels unless there is a magical or supernatural effect cause. Nothing in D&D 5e indicates that the DM can or should tell a player what they think or feel. According to the rules of 5e a player may be asked by the DM to make a persuasion or intimidation check to determine an NPC's reaction if the DM chooses, it does not automatically succeed or fail.

That's it. Play how you want but no matter how many times you ask my answer isn't changing.

stop thinking of it as 'the GM' telling your character how to think/feel and start thinking of it as your character responding to the world they exist in and are a part of

 

[AlViking]

stop thinking of it as 'the GM' telling your character how to think/feel and start thinking of it as your character responding to the world they exist in and are a part of

The characters do respond to the world around them. It's up to the players to decide how.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The characters do respond to the world around them. It's up to the players to decide how.

Right. I don't understand how this basic thing is so hard to get. No one is advocating for unfeeling and unresponsive PCs, we just want to actually roleplay this stuff instead of watching passively as the mechanics play the game for us.

 

[Mecheon]

stop thinking of it as 'the GM' telling your character how to think/feel and start thinking of it as your character responding to the world they exist in and are a part of

I mean, do you want me saying "Like a thousand spiders come out of a bush. Tiny ones. You're scared now" when the drow and fantasy Australia characters should either be 'this is probably a good sign!' or 'yeah nah mate, this reminds me of the time had to help ol' aunt Maudice clean out the shed. She'll be right'

Not everyone shares the same fears and there's absolutely cases where stuff like that should be left up to the character. I use the spider example because that's a common one IRL, and likewise, plenty of reasons why people wouldn't gave them

 

[CreamCloud0]

I mean, do you want me saying "Like a thousand spiders come out of a bush. Tiny ones. You're scared now" when the drow and fantasy Australia characters should either be 'this is probably a good sign!' or 'yeah nah mate, this reminds me of the time had to help ol' aunt Maudice clean out the shed. She'll be right'

Not everyone shares the same fears and there's absolutely cases where stuff like that should be left up to the character. I use the spider example because that's a common one IRL, and likewise, plenty of reasons why people wouldn't gave them

I want, when i say ‘a thousand tiny spiders swarm out of the bush, roll me a WIS save VS fear’ the players don’t get to say ‘nah, my character isn’t feeling that afraid of spiders today’, i do agree what they could potentially say is ‘hey GM, given my character is a drow who has grown up in a culture who both interacts with and worships spiders in our daily life as the patron animal of our culture’s goddess, i’d like to argue they wouldn’t be scared by this’ but that’s not the player just deciding their character won’t be scared.

 

[tetrasodium]

I don't want the DM telling me what my character thinks or feels unless there is a magical or supernatural effect cause. Nothing in D&D 5e indicates that the DM can or should tell a player what they think or feel. According to the rules of 5e a player may be asked by the DM to make a persuasion or intimidation check to determine an NPC's reaction if the DM chooses, it does not automatically succeed or fail.

That's it. Play how you want but no matter how many times you ask my answer isn't changing.

So if your character does not exist as part of the world capable of being influenced in ways like the brief selector extremely reasonable but endless influences you quoted are you declaring that it is creature (sub)type Aberration or outsider who flows through the world in a way that forces it to warp around them rather than existing as part of the world? Given how often someone has declared that the gm needs to talk to players and get every possible rule change or ruling cleared prior to play i would say that it's very much justified expecting you to explain how often that you @Crimson Longinus make that expectation clear in session zero prior to joining the game, can't say I've ever heard of a player doing that.

 

[tetrasodium]

I want, when i say ‘a thousand tiny spiders swarm out of the bush, roll me a WIS save VS fear’ the players don’t get to say ‘nah, my character isn’t feeling that afraid of spiders today’, i do agree what they could potentially say is ‘hey GM, given my character is a drow who has grown up in a culture who both interacts with and worships spiders in our daily life as the patron animal of our culture’s goddess, i’d like to argue they wouldn’t be scared by this’ but that’s not the player just deciding their character won’t be scared.

That's a great example of playing the game with the PC as part of the world and it shows important details. Those underlined bits are too important for a player to brush aside simply because "I control my PC" because those kinds of elements shift the PC from a quantum ogre Schrodinger's cat adjacent state where they can later deny those things as never said whatever the gm guesses if it's convenient later over to a living part of the world who has declared a number of concrete details that might be relevant in useful or not so useful ways to the PC in the future

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So if your character does not exist as part of the world capable of being influenced in ways like the brief selector extremely reasonable but endless influences you quoted are you declaring that it is creature (sub)type Aberration or outsider who flows through the world in a way that forces it to warp around them rather than existing as part of the world?

It has been explained many times, the characters can be influenced and are influenced. You just need to actually do the work and introduce fictional situations that would affect them and the player needs to roleplay it.

 

[tetrasodium]

It has been explained many times, the characters can be influenced and are influenced. You just need to actually do the work and introduce fictional situations that would affect them and the player needs to roleplay it.

So you don't declare your expectation to play an outsider/ Aberration in session zero?

It's telling that you don't seem to extend that obligation of "work" to the player who wants a level of "control" over their PC that the PC no longer exists as part of the world. In fact you openly reject that the player might even be expected to with statements like the above quote assigning it exclusively to the GM.