Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6807594" data-attributes="member: 27160">Gandalf does not make anything true by throwing the ring in the fire in either scenario, here. The truth was simply unknown. If I roll a die - assuming I do so fairly - the result is going to be what it will be. I have no say in it. I simply find out what it is when I roll the die. This is absolutely no different from my frame of reference than if some entity had decided in advance what the die was going to roll.Likewise, when we discover something in the world, we can have no proof that what we discover was true before we discovered it. We just assume that it was, based on our previous experience of the world. In the same way, we can have no absolute proof that the sun will rise tomorrow morning. Years of previous sunrises do not constitute proof, they merely indicate a persistent habit. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />That possibility is easily done in the paradigm [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] is describing. The player just needs to ask a different question: "given the knowledge I have, is there any reason that this cannot be the One Ring?" Roll the dice, add the skill, success = "Yes, there is a reason you know why this cannot be the One Ring"; failure = "No, there is no reason you know of why this could not be the One Ring." Simple.I agree with this completely. From the players' point of view, I don't see that the techniques differ much at all. The difference is all on the GM side, which is why I was wondering about advantages of pre-authoring, from the GM's point of view (the obvious disadvantage being all the prep work required). At the moment I am thinking it has to do with a sort of safety net, or a comfort for when one is uncomfortable with improvising in a complex context. In any case, I'm not sure that prep that is useful for improvisation is significantly less voluminous, although less of it may be actually required.I think there may also be something about "a thing doesn't really exist/isn't really true until the GM knows it" out there - but I would count that as just a cognitive trap, and an unhelpful belief.</blockquote>

Verification