D&D 5E player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)

[Guest 6801328]

I don’t understand. In what way would characters take unwanted actions? If you don’t want your character to take an action, literally all you have to do is not say your character takes it...

For me, the problem is that since I don't usually play that way, when I do I sometimes forget.

 

[Seramus]

I don’t understand. In what way would characters take unwanted actions? If you don’t want your character to take an action, literally all you have to do is not say your character takes it...

The players may not want their characters to be talking, but you are saying you rule the characters must talk because the players are talking.

 

[Charlaquin]

For me, the problem is that since I don't usually play that way, when I do I sometimes forget.

Oh, sure. I’m not unreasonable, if you forget and say something you didn’t mean for your character to, especially as a new player to the group, I’m not gonna be like “too bad, you already said it.”

 

[Charlaquin]

The players may not want their characters to be talking, but you are saying you rule the characters must talk because the players are talking.

I don’t understand the problem here. It is fully within your power not to talk if you don’t want your characters to talk.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The players may not want their characters to be talking, but you are saying you rule the characters must talk because the players are talking.

Just for clarity, are you trying to demonstrate that this house rule is an example of the DM telling players what their characters think and what actions they take?

If so, it's no more so than saying "If you declare an attack and then roll a d20, your character then takes the action."

 

[Ovinomancer]

You know, I think @Seramus has made a good point. For instance, I don't allow player nudity at the table, so maybe that's just like policing characters, because players can't declare actions for their PC if the player is nekkid? Something to ponder, I guess.

 

[Guest 6801328]

For instance, I don't allow player nudity at the table

Huh. Remember earlier in the thread when I said I wanted to play in one of your campaigns?

I retract that.

 

[Charlaquin]

Just for clarity, are you trying to demonstrate that this house rule is an example of the DM telling players what their characters think and what actions they take?

If so, it's no more so than saying "If you declare an attack and then roll a d20, your character then takes the action."

Yeah, I guess that’s what’s confusing me too. The way I see it, this table rule still leaves the character’s thoughts and actions entirely up to the player. And again, I’m not unreasonable about it. Like, if for some reason we do need to slip into the meta-game, like for a rules clarification or something, that doesn’t translate to in-character dialogue, and I’m lenient with players who aren’t used to my style of play.

 

[Seramus]

Just for clarity, are you trying to demonstrate that this house rule is an example of the DM telling players what their characters think and what actions they take?

If so, it's no more so than saying "If you declare an attack and then roll a d20, your character then takes the action."

Yes. The player is not declaring an action, but the DM is saying they take an action anyway (talking in this case).

Player: Hey Bob, do you want to go in first?
DM: The sound of talking alerts the bugbears.
Player: My character didn't say anything!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

You are both essentially correct. What you say translates, through the clouded mirror effect, to what occurs in the fiction. So, when you make references to real-life pop culture and technology, your character makes equivalent references to something in the setting that would evoke a similar reaction. When you talk about being low on HP, your character says something in-fiction that communicates similar information about their wellbeing.

Eww, eww, eww! I would hate that so much! That is utterly antithetical for what I want from an RPG.

And when you talk, out loud, about whether or not you should kill this guard, so do your characters

I don’t see how it’s “policing” anything to rule that what you say translates to what your characters say.

That, however, is a good practice and I would consider that to be one sort of an anti-metagame policy.