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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 8061778">The problem with this analogy is that the result of "recalling lore" is a thought in the character's head, which only the player controls.  If the player wants the thoughts to be correct then maybe asking the DM to adjudicate is a good idea.  However, when the player says, "I recall the time my uncle Frank told me about trolls" not only might the information about trolls be wrong, but the player might not actually have an uncle Frank.  He/she is free to believe that, or at least to roleplay that their character believes that (the player may know perfectly well that there's no uncle Frank) but there is still nothing to adjudicate.Now, if the character travels back to their home and looks for uncle Frank, well now that's an action declaration (likely a long chain of them), so maybe it's time for the DM to do some adjudication.  Maybe there's zero impact on the game, so lo and behold there's uncle Frank.  Or maybe it's important to the plot that this character has no connections to their previous life, so no uncle Frank is to be found.  Or maybe...for reasons I can't quite think of at the moment...the DM decides the outcome is both uncertain and has consequences, so asks for some kind of roll.If it turns out there's no uncle Frank...and to further illustrate how this works...the player is free to start explaining to the other players why this alleged uncle Frank does not seem to exist. But those reasons are also not automatically "true" in-game, not without DM adjudication.(To be honest, this discussion now reminds me of the "5 Int Genius" thread, in which, if I recall correctly, you were similarly unwilling to concede that character thoughts are distinct from game mechanics.)</blockquote>

Verification