Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 8058009">You state that as if it's factual, but it's an opinion.&nbsp; And it is a valid opinion, I'll give it that, but it really is just one way to play.Another way to play is to just let the players decide what they want their characters to know.&nbsp;&nbsp; Traditionalists use a bogeyman argument to invalidate this playstyle: they say that unscrupulous players will use out-of-game knowledge to their advantage.&nbsp; However:a) In a &quot;no player knowledge&quot; game, unscrupulous players will do the same thing, they'll just keep it quiet.b) And, um, don't play with jerks?Again, it's totally valid to want to play in a way that strictly separates player knowledge from character knowledge.&nbsp; I don't personally enjoy doing that, but if you do, cool.&nbsp; However there's no actual, functional, practical reason why that approach works better.&nbsp; It's not &quot;better roleplaying&quot; or &quot;real roleplaying&quot;.&nbsp; It's a kind of roleplaying.&nbsp; It's just something that some gamers enjoy.&nbsp; AND it adds unnecessary complexity to the game: it requires players to keep that distinction in mind.&nbsp; It adds dice rolls to see if characters &quot;know&quot; things.&nbsp; It forces the DM to remember what's secret and what isn't.&nbsp; It causes problems like the one the OP wrote about.The fact that it's more traditional carries zero weight, in my opinion.&nbsp; Again, the skateboarding example.&nbsp; And I'm sure we could all come up with a thousand historical examples in hobbies, sports, professions, technologies, academic disciplines, trades, etc. where staunch (even unthinking) traditionalism has hobbled innovation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 8058009"] You state that as if it's factual, but it's an opinion. And it is a valid opinion, I'll give it that, but it really is just one way to play. Another way to play is to just let the players decide what they want their characters to know. Traditionalists use a bogeyman argument to invalidate this playstyle: they say that unscrupulous players will use out-of-game knowledge to their advantage. However: a) In a "no player knowledge" game, unscrupulous players will do the same thing, they'll just keep it quiet. b) And, um, don't play with jerks? Again, it's totally valid to want to play in a way that strictly separates player knowledge from character knowledge. I don't personally enjoy doing that, but if you do, cool. However there's no actual, functional, practical reason why that approach works better. It's not "better roleplaying" or "real roleplaying". It's a [I]kind[/I] of roleplaying. It's just something that some gamers enjoy. AND it adds unnecessary complexity to the game: it requires players to keep that distinction in mind. It adds dice rolls to see if characters "know" things. It forces the DM to remember what's secret and what isn't. It causes problems like the one the OP wrote about. The fact that it's more traditional carries zero weight, in my opinion. Again, the skateboarding example. And I'm sure we could all come up with a thousand historical examples in hobbies, sports, professions, technologies, academic disciplines, trades, etc. where staunch (even unthinking) traditionalism has hobbled innovation. [/QUOTE]

Verification