Do you think that it's alright for a DM to do this?

[Emiricol]

Re: Re: Re: Do you think that it's alright for a DM to do this?

So, in your opinion it would be ok for your character to invent, say, banking in his world, because you (as a player) know how it works but it hasn't been invented in his world? how about stock exchange? Steam engines? Even if your character had an int 6?

All those things are doable in fantasy worlds, but DMs might prefer not to change their worlds just because one character likes to use OOC knowledge. These examples are just to show that total control of the character is not with the player, necessarily.

Nope. As DM I'd speak directly to the player and tell him I won't allow it. That's not the same as telling a player what his PC would do. Or, I'd allow it and let it be the complete flop it would be. Such systems evolve over generations. I'd say that the NPCs of the world won't trust his funny money, and how can you buy a part of a company? What a rediculous idea. And so on.

Next.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

about names. I said this recently in a naming thread and well thnk there should be limits, but they are limits of names people lielly couldn't come up with like names of technological devices of today.

Other names that are just silly, well guess what in the real world silly names exist. It breaks my fealing of a realistic world more to have a world with naming conventions that never are broken than to have silly names.

So I say go for it have silly names, there just will be ingame resposnes to it.

 

[Chimera]

And as we all know, Grundleforge is so much less silly and more D&D like than "Bob Dylan the Bard".

Er, um.....yeah, right.

If the name is really bad, I would prefer to handle it in-game. No NPC is going to take Snotty Boogerman seriously. Ever.

 

[Pielorinho]

Lemme ask y'all this. If I wanted to join your game and play a farmer who enjoyed working in his fields and who saw no reason to go on an adventure, would you be willing to accommodate my style of play? Would you field my requests to roleplay through the Going to Market scene? Would you accommodate me as I plowed my way through another excruciating set of "Profession: Farmer" checks to see if my wheat fields were growing well? Would you farm out appropriate challenges to my character -- foxes invading the henhouse, a patch of bad weather, one of the children wanting to run off to the big city?

Or would you roll your eyes and say, "C'mon, Daniel, be serious and come up with an adventurer character!"

As a DM and as a player, I expect everyone to create characters that will fit in the story we're telling together. There are many ways to create inappropriate characters: heinously evil characters in a heroic game, farmer characters in an adventuring game, silly-named characters in a serious game, serious characters in a game of Paranoia. Persisting in creating an inappropriate character is rude, as rude as coming to a Formal-themed cocktail party in your jeans and baseball cap.

It has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of a silly name. It has everything to do with whether you're creating something appropriate to the game at hand. If you were unclear on what was appropriate, then the DM should gently enlighten you; and then you should apologize and make appropriate changes.

Daniel