Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6153915" data-attributes="member: 6681948">The flowerpots are a pretty high detail example. Of course, the GM might be aware that the occupant is a bizarre creature whose odd qualities include a &quot;black thumb&quot;, such that plants wither and die if left in his presence, having flowerpots on his windowsill seems unlikely. Or if he is a disguised alien who has no need or desire for &quot;decoration&quot; and can't fathom why these earthlings do, so there are no extraneous objects on the windowsill.The Orcish Automatons being forced to become Orcs vulnerable to mind-affecting Taunts is a much better example of GM knowledge which precludes a player desire for reasons they don't currently know.For myself, &quot;is there a flowerpot or something similar on the windowsill - I want to chuck it down on the climber's head&quot;, assuming no issues that would suggest there is, or is not, is simply resolved by a random chance, or just &quot;no reason why not - sure, there is a flowerpot there&quot;. We don't need a feat to let the player request a flowerpot, or a points mechanism where there can be no flowerpot because he's spent all his Scenery Points for the day.&nbsp;Nor am I sure it’s a good thing if the request for a flowerpot being denied automatically tells the players that the absence of a flowerpot is very significant.&nbsp; Maybe it is, though – it explains some of those quantum leaps of deduction often present in the source materials, as it focuses the players on the issues that are, in fact, relevant, and away from red herrings, where casual observers would never think about WHY that absence of flowerpots is significant, or what it might mean.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6153915, member: 6681948"] The flowerpots are a pretty high detail example. Of course, the GM might be aware that the occupant is a bizarre creature whose odd qualities include a "black thumb", such that plants wither and die if left in his presence, having flowerpots on his windowsill seems unlikely. Or if he is a disguised alien who has no need or desire for "decoration" and can't fathom why these earthlings do, so there are no extraneous objects on the windowsill. The Orcish Automatons being forced to become Orcs vulnerable to mind-affecting Taunts is a much better example of GM knowledge which precludes a player desire for reasons they don't currently know. For myself, "is there a flowerpot or something similar on the windowsill - I want to chuck it down on the climber's head", assuming no issues that would suggest there is, or is not, is simply resolved by a random chance, or just "no reason why not - sure, there is a flowerpot there". We don't need a feat to let the player request a flowerpot, or a points mechanism where there can be no flowerpot because he's spent all his Scenery Points for the day. Nor am I sure it’s a good thing if the request for a flowerpot being denied automatically tells the players that the absence of a flowerpot is very significant. Maybe it is, though – it explains some of those quantum leaps of deduction often present in the source materials, as it focuses the players on the issues that are, in fact, relevant, and away from red herrings, where casual observers would never think about WHY that absence of flowerpots is significant, or what it might mean. [/QUOTE]

Verification