Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Toras" data-source="post: 4286084" data-attributes="member: 13626">Mustrum Ridcully I find your post well thought out, your prose clear, and your example apt.  Having said that, I must disagree that such things are in any way equivalent.  Having your village burn down is something that happens to you, rather than an action taken.  The character reacts and just because the player chose that background doesn't make it not suck for the character and motivate appropraitely.  Moreover, if the character returns from the dead, it may be because it was not yet his time or that he had unfinished business rather than I want to play more.  The non-combat example is a matter of narrative, I will admit but having the players make the tactical decisions is something that can gut much that I enjoy out of the game.  I as a player am presented with a great deal more knowledge than my character has any right to expect.  Take for example the fact that I as a player will always know where my allies are, while the character may not.  I will know if there is an enemy behind a pillar, while my character will not.  I can predict an ambush when it would be dramatically approprate, but my character can still be suprised.  I as a player might notice my GM grabbing the Book of Undead nastiness, but it would be bad pool for my character to start shopping for a weapon of distruption or undead bane.  In character logic is far less corrosive to the experience in my own opinion.  Moreover, my character may have skills or backgrounds that I lack.  Besides, if the Quest or other in game elements are linked to the player rather than the character, it is far cohesive thing.</blockquote>

Verification