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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5723518" data-attributes="member: 8835">this is a good point.  I play D&D.  I don't houserule it much, and while I use it for a lot of kinds of games, I don't want to buy another game or turn it into another game.I could do without the big fancy academic words like simulationist or narrative control.  Nobody agrees on their meaning.But I do recognize, that for all the eons D&D has existed, something fishy is going on when players ask questions.  They are both trying to get information, and trying to manipulate the situation.It's generally accepted that some level of that is OK as far as the player manipulating the game world.It's also accepted that some facts are beyond a players ability to manipulate or determine, even for themselves.  Chargen rules or GM approval rules limit what your PC can have for a background.  Game rules are usually quite clear in limiting your PCs ability to move, fight or shoot fireballs from his mouth.And if we ratchet this up further, the argument of "That's not what your character would do" has existed for as long as D&D has existed.  Right or wrong, when a player says he is playing X kind of character and then wants his PC to do -X which goes against what he declared his PC was like, the GM is in a pickle.Does he warn the PC and threaten the player's "narrative" control?Does he block the PC action, and negate the player's "narrative" control?Does he let it happen, and damage the internal consistency of the world?Does he let it happen, and create consequences for it as part of the game?</blockquote>

Verification