Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6876392" data-attributes="member: 16814">Then you've slightly misunderstood the argument.  It isn't that I think that LOL evaded mechanics when, it's that if you allow her to narrate as if she evaded mechanics in the first place, you've set this situation up and the latter case definitely requires that you evade mechanics.  The only real function of the initial INT check is whether or not the DM gives information.  LOL fails, so the DM doesn't give the information.  LOL then enters into the fiction that she really does know the answer but won't tell.  This is weird, and I think very disruptive, but it's not evading mechanics.  The evasion comes with ZoT which checks the fiction for the truth, not the INT check.  LOL has created a paradox because she entered into the fiction that her knowing is the truth, even if the DM didn't give the information.  So the player has no information, but LOL does.  LOL cannot lie about this under the ZoT.Essentially, the initial allowance of narration that contravenes the mechanics sets up the latter paradox and need to actually evade the mechanics.  The narration of the INT check doesn't evade mechanics, it's just obnoxious.I don't have a problem with LOL's player writing fiction in their off time.  Why would I?But I do have issue with it at the table.  And the difference is that she's not writing a story, now, she's entering information into the shared fiction.  That narration impacts the other players and the DM because it informs them about how LOL is as a character, and modifies how the will interact with her and engage her.  The fiction shared at the table is fundamentally different from writing a story in your room because it is shared fiction.  Everyone at the table buys in and will use that narration to inform future actions.  The DM should be listening to player narrations for story hooks and to understand better what the player wants out of that character.  Insisting that the narration is totally divorced from the game a la independant fiction writing is a total non sequitur.  It literally doesn't follow from the basic premise of a roleplaying game.Now, some systems exist that do totally separate narrative from mechanics, and they're fine games.  But D&D, and 5e in particular, weaves far too much of the fiction into it's mechanics.  Charm person, dominate, ZoT, and other spells all interact at the fiction level to a greater or lesser degree.  In D&D as written, you just can't separate the two completely without modifications.  Which has been my singular point all along -- you can do it, and I'm sure you have a blast playing, but you're changing some rules to do it.True, but a concept that hinges on gainsaying mechanical outcomes is one that needs a lot to make not annoying.</blockquote>

Verification