D&D 5E Do PCs at your table have script immunity?

[Jfdlsjfd]

For sure. But most gaming advice doesn't go quite that far lol, it's usually really practical approaches to situations or ways of dealing with problem players or the like.

Not disagreeing with your decision to disengage, but I personally don't think this "no place" is a reasonable position, supported by any kind of logic. I guess we'll never know the exact reasoning.

There is no need for reasoning. It's a matter of personal preference. There is certainly no logical argument for my dislike of having hand-outs in adventures, or boxed text to describe a room. I'd prefer them not to be there and the sacrificed trees corpses being used for printing something more useful or, barring that, with nothing. Are boxed text or handout useful to some? Certainly! Should I refrain from expressing my displeasure with them? Certainly not in a forum where we discuss these things. I think it's a very apt analogy with the poster's problem with "social advice" in RPG books: it's of no use to him, so he disagrees with them being there. It's not a logical demonstration leading to the logical conclusion of removing or keeping them, but a matter of preference.

Even if people try to respect the opinions of others and find common ground, like, innately, or because they were raised well, they don't always have great tools to do it, or to do it in a gaming situation. I've seen this in action, even. I actually learned a ton about resolving conflicts and managing a group from running RPGs, which I've used IRL for things like being foreman on a jury, running meetings at work, and so on. Some of what I learned I might eventually have figured out myself, but some suggestions in rulebooks got me there a lot quicker. I've seen it with others, too, but that's a long story. Tools make people more capable.

Which is a perfectly cromulent matter of personal preferences. Both your views and the poster you're replying to are statements on what you want to see more of in RPGs products, and I don't think it was intended to demonstrate the superiority of one's preference over another. Having those preference expressed freely is, at most, a useful tool for prospective publishers so they can feel the expectations of their public and try to maximize their sales and less an exercise in convincing other to switch their preferences.

When that happens I try and have a quick session 0 with that player, be it in person before the game, by messages on the phone, on discord... It always helps them get up to speed with what the table is doing, and always gives me cool hooks for their character.

I feel session 0 is intimidating. Talking about the next campaign while having a beer is the usual form of my group's sessions 0 and I think most of us don't even realize it's what we are doing and would be puzzled at the idea of actually having a sit-down session devoted to discussing.

 

[Bolares]

Talking about the next campaign while having a beer is the usual form of my group's sessions 0

That’s a perfectly fine session 0. It doesn’t need to be stric for formal. The import thing is to talk about the game

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There is no need for reasoning. It's a matter of personal preference. There is certainly no logical argument for my dislike of having hand-outs in adventures, or boxed text to describe a room. I'd prefer them not to be there and the sacrificed trees corpses being used for printing something more useful or, barring that, with nothing. Are boxed text or handout useful to some? Certainly! Should I refrain from expressing my displeasure with them? Certainly not in a forum where we discuss these things. I think it's a very apt analogy with the poster's problem with "social advice" in RPG books: it's of no use to him, so he disagrees with them being there. It's not a logical demonstration leading to the logical conclusion of removing or keeping them, but a matter of preference.

He didn't present it as a matter of preference, he presented it as illogical/wrong for the information to be there. He just never expanded it out into a rational argument with actual reasoning. I don't see any "Well it may well help some people but I have no use for it" or similar equivocation that would back up your reading. Rather he ALL CAPS says it has NO PLACE in RPG books. That's an extremely strong/bold statement that doesn't sound like mere preference to me.

Also I'm not presenting my opinion as purely preference. I'm suggesting it literally makes sense, and is correct, for a book purporting to be advice for Dungeon Masters to contain advice on how to manage/run an RPG group which might not relate solely or strictly to rules. I don't think that's "preference", I think that's basic logic. And it's easy to see that the overwhelming majority of RPGs do indeed have that sort of information. I've presented an actual argument and can back it up, and it's pretty straightforward. I think it's actually a bad idea for RPGs to not contain advice of this type, in fact, but that's been rare for a very long time.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Also, we should remember that the same books are used by people who are 40+ years old, and kids who are, like, 10 and 12 years old. If someone is going to sell a game that requires a lot of interpersonal interaction to kids, it makes huge amounts of sense to give those kids at least a little advice on how to get by.

Exactly. I learned a ton from suggestions in books at those ages, and a lot of books correctly identified bad/negative traits or playstyles (i.e. ones destructive to everyone having a good time) that me or other people might have or even were getting into, and seeing them written down, they seemed so dumb that we then shied away from them for the most part.

I also found advice in books a lot more useful than the advice on the early internet, but that's a whole other discussion.

 

[Umbran]

I also found advice in books a lot more useful than the advice on the early internet, but that's a whole other discussion.

The internet gives humankind unparalleled access to information.

Sturgeon's Law, however, tells us that means we have unparalleled access to crap.

 

[billd91]

The internet gives humankind unparalleled access to information.

Sturgeon's Law, however, tells us that means we have unparalleled access to crap.

My garden fertilizer woes are over!

Wait, you meant electronic crap? Awwwwww!

 

[TwoSix]

You will generally be hard pressed to find gamers that are more challenge oriented than I am. Here's my Quantic Foundry profile:

My Gamer Motivation Profile: Action-Oriented, Proficient, Relaxed, Social, Deeply Immersed, and Creative

Want to know your profile? Take the survey!

quantic.page.link

I'm a bard! Which pretty much fits, and would make @Snarf Zagyg disappointed, so win-win!

My Gamer Motivation Profile: Proficient, Relaxed, and Creative

Want to know your profile? Take the survey!

quantic.page.link

 

[Blue]

I've been in some non-gaming organizations that in theory operated using this model. I say in theory because the in-practice quickly turned into a morass of passive-aggressiveness and backbiting, leading to the organizations shedding members as fast as they acquired them, and eventually imploding.

Consensus only works if nobody is stubborn. It only takes one stubborn person to blow up the consensus model, and IME everybody is stubborn at least to some extent.

Consensus works best in small groups who are committed to whatever is going on. Which does cover many gaming groups.

When I was in my 20s, I bought a house with five other people, and we used consensus to make descisions both as owners and as people living there. We had basically worked out for months before even starting to look how we would do things, and had a lot of trust in each other. We tried to work out things before emotions got engaged, and we even used things like a talking stick going around the table to make sure those who were less likely to speak up were heard. And trust me, we had stubborn people in that group, starting with myself. And they are all still dear friends of mine over two decades later.

That said, I'm sure you've used consensus before in a game group, if at the very least for scheduling sessions.

The DM's authority in-game is given by the players. That's a group of people getting together and all coming to a common agreement of what to play, granting a role of authority within the game to one of the people, and then doing so. That one person pitches ideas or may gather people does not make it less of a consensus decision. If a space opera game using a PbtA hack is pitched, and I don't want to play space opera, either I am convinced, I end up not being part of the group that makes the consensus descision, or we work out something that is mutually agreeable to everyone.

From personal experience, yes.

IME they do until the campaign ends or they are asked to leave, whichever comes first; unless they leave sooner in a hissy fit when bad things do happen to their PCs. Whether they stay engaged in the hobby after that I've no idea.

I just want to point out you have very biased language here. You'd probably disagree if it was rewritten as "IME they do until the campaign ends or the DM unilaterally and tyranically banishes them from the game, whichever comes first; unless they make a reasoned descision that this dynamic is not for them and they switch to another group." It really vilifies the one position instead of discussing it.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm a bard! Which pretty much fits, and would make @Snarf Zagyg disappointed, so win-win!

My Gamer Motivation Profile: Proficient, Relaxed, and Creative

Want to know your profile? Take the survey!

quantic.page.link

You have me sincere condolences. Personally, I don't think it's very nice of those Quantic Foundry people to bully others by calling them Bards, but what do I know?

 

[Blue]

'Session 0' can be tricky when players are joining an ongoing campaign. But yes I do agree that synchronous communication generally works best.

As a side note, I just lost two players in my game of 1.5 years. They are a couple and arfe moving out of state. Tonight I'm having a Session 0 for two new prospective players. Intending to tell them about the DMing style, the game, and what they are getting into in order to make sure everyone thinks it's a good fit. Then we'll brainstorm characters and such.

If it's not the right fit, it's better to spend a session now and work that out civilly before emotions get engaged because "you just killed my character" or something similar comes up. Better for everyone around the table as well as the person who may not be a good fit for this particular game.