Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 9251363" data-attributes="member: 67296">By that I meant that they are nevertheless consistent with the story and the setting, but I may just be arguing about a definition of "coherence" that doesn't agree with yours, rather than disagreeing about the premise of your OP.I get what you mean about setting and story being separate and potentially different concepts however, and what is considered coherent and consistent about the story (and characters) can differ from what is considered the norm for that setting. In RPG however, the setting often comes before the story (rather than creating a setting that serves the story), or else a setting is chosen by the type of story wanted.So for me, it depends. If the DM proposes a setting without magic because they want to make a story without magic, then a player insisting on playing a magic-user is counterproductive. If the intention is to provide a background world tapestry that doesn't involve magic, then a magic-user PC can work and prove very exciting. But this choice should still be coherent with the setting however. For example, most people shouldn't have much protection against magic, and spells might produce results for which adversaries don't have immediate contingencies ready. Everybody being able to counter every spell from the PC would be incoherent.</blockquote>