Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Oops, Players Accidentally See Solution to Exploration Challenge
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7888694" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>When information so determined becomes to great, or too inextricable, cases are dismissed or mistrials are declared. Further, the judge is operating under a relatively codified set of instructions they do not have the luxury of ignoring. This isn't the case for leisure activities like RPGs that have no such decision requirements. If you're postulating that RPGs have codified decision-making processes for choosing player action declarations, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, it's the player making such choices, and they do so with their knowledge, and so their choice of decision making process is informed by that knowledge, just like the judge's choice to exclude or include information in their decision process is informed by actually having that knowledge.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Really? Let's use a simple procedure for choosing which passage to take in a dungeon. "Always go left." Let's say you're at a T-junction, low on health, and the left hand passage has a scrawled sign saying "dragon," it smells of dragon, you see deep claw marks in the floor as if from a dragon, you hear dragon-ish sounds and roars, and you see flashes of light as if from huge exhalations of flame. Meanwhile, the right passage has a sign saying "exit", you smell fresh air, see light akin to daylight, and feel a clean wind from that passage. </p><p></p><p>It seems that choosing to use the standard operating procedure must be informed by other knowledge, here. Using it as if you have no other knowledge is impossible -- you're choosing to do so in spite of that other knowledge, not in absence of it. That you can use it like this has never, ever, been the point of anyone.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As noted by [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER], you're making a declaration absent knowledge, here, not with knowledge. Being held to a decision you made absent knowledge after knowledge has been revealed is a different argument altogether -- you did not decide with knowledge. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It lacks resemblance because, in a blind declaration situation you're making a choice absent knowledge that will be shortly revealed. In [USER=2525]@Mistwell[/USER]'s argument, you're choosing a resolution mechanic to arbitrarily decide what action declarations the players make because of the knowledge you have. This is night and day for the topic at hand. Again, the point isn't that you can't choose an arbitrary decision mechanic, but that the choice of mechanic is inextricably tied to what knowledge you do have. </p><p></p><p>I think there's a bit of ends justifying means here, at least in the sense that you're arguing that you can achieve the same outcome regardless of knowledge if you select the same resolution mechanic. IE, if, without knowledge, I'd roll a die to decide and, having knowledge, I choose to still roll a die to decide so the outcomes are the same. But this isn't the argument being made -- the point of RPGs is that players get to decide their action declarations with respect to their goals in the game. If you have knowledge that directly impacts the decision, you cannot then decide without reference to that knowledge -- however you choose it's due to your knowledge. This is fundamental human nature and unavoidable.</p><p></p><p>Now, specifically, the point isn't that you always use an arbitrary decision mechanic -- [USER=2525]@Mistwell[/USER] never advanced this idea. Instead, the issue isn't whether you use knowledge to make choices, but what you should do if the knowledge you have is considered improperly obtained. My argument is that, absent bad-faith play where you're engaged in lying by omission or commission, the DM's position as primary author of the fiction means that such 'improper' determinations are entirely in their hands. As such, forcing players to use arbitrary decision mechanics in the face of have knowledge otherwise is a choice forced by the DM, and entirely avoidable. That such arbitrary decision mechanics exist is trivially associated to my point. That arbitrary decision mechanics can be used absent or with knowledge is trivially associated to my point. The point I've made is that choosing to use such measures solely to correct for a choice the DM has made about the nature of the fiction is entirely upon the DM. The point I've also made is that such a choice of arbitrary decision mechanic just to suit the DM is made entirely dependently upon the presence of knowledge judged by the DM to be "improper." It cannot be made otherwise and still be germane to the topic.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I find this statement interesting. I've previously understood you to not like to play heavily GM directed games because you enjoy having a say in the resulting fiction. Yet, here, you claim that you would not be bothered by the GM directing you into an arbitrary decision mechanic just to support the GM's preferred version of the fiction. I find it hard to reconcile these two statements, and I wonder which one I've misinterpreted.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7888694, member: 16814"] When information so determined becomes to great, or too inextricable, cases are dismissed or mistrials are declared. Further, the judge is operating under a relatively codified set of instructions they do not have the luxury of ignoring. This isn't the case for leisure activities like RPGs that have no such decision requirements. If you're postulating that RPGs have codified decision-making processes for choosing player action declarations, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, it's the player making such choices, and they do so with their knowledge, and so their choice of decision making process is informed by that knowledge, just like the judge's choice to exclude or include information in their decision process is informed by actually having that knowledge. Really? Let's use a simple procedure for choosing which passage to take in a dungeon. "Always go left." Let's say you're at a T-junction, low on health, and the left hand passage has a scrawled sign saying "dragon," it smells of dragon, you see deep claw marks in the floor as if from a dragon, you hear dragon-ish sounds and roars, and you see flashes of light as if from huge exhalations of flame. Meanwhile, the right passage has a sign saying "exit", you smell fresh air, see light akin to daylight, and feel a clean wind from that passage. It seems that choosing to use the standard operating procedure must be informed by other knowledge, here. Using it as if you have no other knowledge is impossible -- you're choosing to do so in spite of that other knowledge, not in absence of it. That you can use it like this has never, ever, been the point of anyone. As noted by [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER], you're making a declaration absent knowledge, here, not with knowledge. Being held to a decision you made absent knowledge after knowledge has been revealed is a different argument altogether -- you did not decide with knowledge. It lacks resemblance because, in a blind declaration situation you're making a choice absent knowledge that will be shortly revealed. In [USER=2525]@Mistwell[/USER]'s argument, you're choosing a resolution mechanic to arbitrarily decide what action declarations the players make because of the knowledge you have. This is night and day for the topic at hand. Again, the point isn't that you can't choose an arbitrary decision mechanic, but that the choice of mechanic is inextricably tied to what knowledge you do have. I think there's a bit of ends justifying means here, at least in the sense that you're arguing that you can achieve the same outcome regardless of knowledge if you select the same resolution mechanic. IE, if, without knowledge, I'd roll a die to decide and, having knowledge, I choose to still roll a die to decide so the outcomes are the same. But this isn't the argument being made -- the point of RPGs is that players get to decide their action declarations with respect to their goals in the game. If you have knowledge that directly impacts the decision, you cannot then decide without reference to that knowledge -- however you choose it's due to your knowledge. This is fundamental human nature and unavoidable. Now, specifically, the point isn't that you always use an arbitrary decision mechanic -- [USER=2525]@Mistwell[/USER] never advanced this idea. Instead, the issue isn't whether you use knowledge to make choices, but what you should do if the knowledge you have is considered improperly obtained. My argument is that, absent bad-faith play where you're engaged in lying by omission or commission, the DM's position as primary author of the fiction means that such 'improper' determinations are entirely in their hands. As such, forcing players to use arbitrary decision mechanics in the face of have knowledge otherwise is a choice forced by the DM, and entirely avoidable. That such arbitrary decision mechanics exist is trivially associated to my point. That arbitrary decision mechanics can be used absent or with knowledge is trivially associated to my point. The point I've made is that choosing to use such measures solely to correct for a choice the DM has made about the nature of the fiction is entirely upon the DM. The point I've also made is that such a choice of arbitrary decision mechanic just to suit the DM is made entirely dependently upon the presence of knowledge judged by the DM to be "improper." It cannot be made otherwise and still be germane to the topic. I find this statement interesting. I've previously understood you to not like to play heavily GM directed games because you enjoy having a say in the resulting fiction. Yet, here, you claim that you would not be bothered by the GM directing you into an arbitrary decision mechanic just to support the GM's preferred version of the fiction. I find it hard to reconcile these two statements, and I wonder which one I've misinterpreted. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Oops, Players Accidentally See Solution to Exploration Challenge
Top