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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7742160">Oh, I just mean too much trouble for what it's worth, in that case.  I was just describing what it would take to achieve the result he was describing, to backpedal from saying that you couldn't model it.  I didn't say it was practical.Hiring actors to jump out of the closet in vampire masks at the right time would also be meaningful and immersive, but I'm not going to go through that trouble, either.Aye, there's the rub.  You don't particularly like my interpretation.  I get it.  It's ok to just say, "Meh...I don't like that way of playing."  Instead it's this unrelenting philosophical game to prove that there's no distinction between two different categories, when we both know there's a pretty clear distinction, despite the fact that we can, if we try hard enough for the purposes of being argumentative, come up with tricky edge cases in which the distinction is blurry.Then why *ever* let the players make in-game choices?  If the DM leaves a hint of how to make a future challenge easier, do you ever let the players themselves figure out the hint?  If so, you're contradicting what you just claimed.  The player decides to solve the puzzle, through application of the mechanics vis-a-vis the character.  Right?  You should make them roll Int or Wis, and if they succeed they automatically "get" the hint, and if they fail then they're not allowed to use the information.  It's fine if they say it out loud, of course, because everybody else at the table is also playing this way, so there's no harm in giving away secrets.  "Oh, yeah, Tony, that would probably work.  But we all failed our Int checks so we're not going to make the connection that the word on the scroll is the command word for the golem."  In fact, the DM could just say, "You find the command word for the golem on the scroll.  Everybody roll to see if your character figures out that's what it is."  And it will be just as fun for everybody if they all fail the roll.I don't think you play this way.  (And if you do then CLEARLY we are not ever going to see eye to eye on this.)Assuming you do sometimes let players use their own minds in place of their characters', then you are being inconsistent.  So, do you just wing it, based on what feels right, or do you have objective criteria for which side of the line any situation falls on?</blockquote>

Verification