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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6993860" data-attributes="member: 2656">People disagree strenuously about everything in the real word all the time, just look at the internet! There is no standard for "Naturalistic Logic" and I've seen many versions muted by different sources with huge variations. The failure modes of naturalistic logic in a game is particularly insidious as when the DM is adjudicating according to his or her own worldview, disagreeing with rulings implies you disagree with their worldview as well. Limited game bandwidth, misunderstandings, and differences of opinion mean that players can very much be surprised by the results of adjudication. The complex interactions of a set of simple rules or rulings can lead to unexpected places.Along with "Common sense isn't common", I would add the observation that "Naturalistic logic isn't Natural" as both qualities are very subjective..Statements like "I don't understand how you can misinterpret this situation, it's crystal clear to me", and "I don't need to provide explanations, it should be obvious" are symptomatic of such failures to communicate, and I've seen them again and again.Precisely because fairy tale logic is unusual, there is more onus on the DM to provide relevant context.IMO this is yet another spectrum rather than a binary decision. The degree the gameworld is propelled by the interaction of a weave of logical cause-and-effect chains, or by grand sweeping themes and iconic NPCs can vary from campaign to campaign, sessions to session or even scene to scene. I prefer to use rules systems rather than personal opinions on "naturalistic logic" to run a game, as the former is accessible to everyone and can be debated, whereas disagreements as to the latter are immediately personal as potentially disagreeing with the worldview of the DM.My own mantra as its evolved is that the DMs responsibility is to run an entertaining and accessible game for all involved and that versimilitude and fidelity to setting are secondary considerations. I've seen too many games where theoretical considerations have dragged the game to places that aren't fun for some of the participants.</blockquote>

Verification