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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Doctor Futurity" data-source="post: 7720660" data-attributes="member: 10738">I'll throw out this idea, actually, to suggest that settings actually become more restrictive the more you learn about them. The idea here is that when you know nothing about a setting, it can seem overwhelming, and if you're a GM it means that if you want to use that setting you have your work cut out for you.At this level of knowledge (noob reading up for the first time) prepublished modules are a godsend and anything at this stage will require players understanding that the GM is limited in his base of understanding. So a player with more knowledge trying to act on it against the focus of the GM is not being a team sport. If your module or resource supports the game you're running, that's good enough for you.But if you read a bit in to it....or watch the movies, or what-not, then you learn enough to do some stuff with it, but maybe not too much. I'm not a FR fan, but I have played in enough FR games and computer games that I think I could run a relaxed campaign set in the Sword Coast region without much effort, and could have players visit Waterdeep, Baldur's Gate, Luskan, etc. and not feel overly threatened by the material I don't know. If someone asked me about the Moonsea Isles, Calimshan, Cormyr or some other region I'd probably say, "Yeah those places exist but nothing politically or otherwise interesting is happening over there that impacts what you're doing here right now in the Sword Coast." And if a player with an encyclopedia of knowledge accosted me with some obscure fact, I'd turn it around and ask him to work out the rationale for why "obscure point X" is not impacting my campaign, since he knows enough about it to provide that clarity.At this level of understanding, the GM is probably able to run premade modules efficiently and riff off of them a bit when needed, and can design his own games without needing more lore than he knows for the region of choice. Players with greater knowledge than him ought to be welcome to comment but are hopefully not the argumentative kind that argue with the GM, and should realize that their knowledge does not override GM rulings. At this level, if Waterdeep at war with Cormyr sounds cool and you can imagine it, then have at it!But now imagine I've read all the FR books and novels and have sunk 1,000 hours into lore content and I'm that guy who can point out some obscure fact about Cormyr and its connection to the Sword Coast (my example is random, I don't actually know enough to say such a connection could exist). Now I might actually feel like doing a campaign is hard, because I know too much, and will be second-guessing myself with my own body of knowledge. I know so much that when that know-it-all player starts contradicting me, I realize I will be arguing my counter-perspective on the lore and the two of us will be effectively crippling the game for the other less lore informed players. And worse yet, I know enough to realize the various scenarios and conditions in which Elminster, by the lore as presented, should be swooping in to save the day.So at this level, the GM has a detailed body of lore and is knowledgeable enough that it might be hard to find a player more knowledgeable. While the scenario above could happen, it is more likely that the players will take for granted that what the GM knows is true and correct for purposes of the game. In this case, only the GM, in his self doubt about his body of knowledge, is hampering his own experience. "I can't have Waterdeep fight Cormyr, it would never happen! And the players can't do this because surely Elminster would intervene." Etc Etc.So yeah, I could imagine a scenario or two in which knowing too much about a setting can actually make it harder to run. But maybe the reality is these are more self-inflicted perceptions than anything else. I know those "lore guys" exist and I've run in to them on occasion.....and I know enough about certain settings to be one.....but the problem is not how much lore you know or must know, but whether you are socially diplomatic enough to realize that the GM is always right, and you extra lore advice should be presented if it is welcome at the table, not despite whether it is welcome. In the end, it's still all about being polite and player dynamics, and the level of investment a GM is willing to put in to a setting.</blockquote>

Verification