Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4039290" data-attributes="member: 42582">Following KM's quotes from the DMG, I agree that D&D runs this way (although not all this way).But whether this is the best way to play is up for grabs. On the narrativist reading of D&D rules, NPC hit points aren't plot protection for those NPCs, but adversity regulation for when they engage with the PCs.Looking at each of your responses:1) Looks like a case where the Lois Lane rules should have been invoked - the problem is that the GM has improperly exercised narrative control.2) Perhaps (and others have made this point earlier, including KM). But it depends very much on what the play group understands to be the scope of the action resolution mechanics.3) I still think this is absurd, as I said above. The GM could have stipulated that King Thumble died in combat with a kobold after the kobold struck many lucky blows, while King Thumble's luck completely ran out (Kobold rolled all 20s, Thumble all 1s) and the players (and their PCs) would not therefore become completely scared of horses. They'd just figure that the King had got very unlucky.4) This also looks like a case of conflict within the group about what the rules and playstyle are.Of course there are always stories that can be told within the framework of the action resolution mechanics. Sometimes, however, one wants to have the gameworld evolve a different way. Is it obligatory, at that point, to go down the RM route and create action resolution mechanics that allow it to happen to the PCs too?I gather you do think it is obligatory to go down the RM route.Alternatively, one can use this set of rules: (i) when PCs are involved, use the character build and action resolution mechanics; (ii) otherwise, determine the state of the gameworld by narration (distributed between GM and players as determined by further sub-rules).There will be no difference between on-stage and off-stage in terms of the physics of the gameworld. There will be a difference in terms of the rules used to determine what happens (which rules are not the physics of the gameworld).On-stage, of course, no PC will die from falling off a horse (because the PC enjoys hit-point plot protection). But this does not contradict the physics of the gameworld (in which people can die from falling off horses). That something never happens to the PCs doesn't show it couldn't have happened.</blockquote>

Verification