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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7886595" data-attributes="member: 16814">It's a counterfactual to illustrate a point.  If the PC would pick an unsafe path even if they knew of a safe one, that's the optimal option for that PC.  If the PC would not pick the unsafe path with knowledge of a safe one, then doing so is not optimal for that PC.  The point is that you can't ask the player to not know something they know; any choice the player makes will be based on that knowledge.  The goal should be for the player to be making choices as an advocate for the PC -- ie, making choices with the PC's goals in mind.  No, I'm saying that if the DM's scenario relies on expecting players to ignore knowledge they have, then it's the DM's fault when problems like this occur.  There's no such thing as PC knowledge -- they are fictional creations of real people that actually know things.  You can't make a choice absent knowledge you have, and if the game and DM expect you to act as if you do not know, that's the fault of the game or DM.  In the case of the OP, there's a number of trivially easy ways to correct for the accidental release of information so failure to do so and instead expect that your players will pretend to forget things is a poor choice and should not be encouraged.  The DM should strive to create situation where player knowledge is a good thing rather than create situations where they expect players to act as if they don't know things.I suppose there's some tables that would find pretending to not know trolls are killed by fire while their PCs are mauled, but that's not really advocating for their PCs, it's mummery.  Mummery is fun, sure, but it shouldn't be the expected baseline when it's pretty easy to come up with scenes that don't require it of players.</blockquote>

Verification