D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Oofta]

But that's not what it says - so that's an easy one!


And here's the "why not" question. all it allows you to do is get a message to your contact, whether that will be of real benefit - that's not what the feature does. ALL it says is, criminal organizations tend to be similar and a true criminal (the background) has a good understanding of how they work and can exploit that, even somewhere they've never been before.

It's meant to be a roleplaying aid not an I win button.

If they're in a TRULY alien place where NOTHING works as they know it to? well that's a different story and that's the challenge.

Why not? Because it assumes world and even plane spanning criminal organizations. I don't assume that in my campaign world.

Someone who has a criminal background because they were a runner for Nine fingers Malone in some backwater city in no way has those kind of contacts around the world.

 

[Mort]

Why not? Because it assumes world and even plane spanning criminal organizations. I don't assume that in my campaign world.

Someone who has a criminal background because they were a runner for Nine fingers Malone in some backwater city in no way has those kind of contacts around the world.

They don't get or NEED contacts around the world, that's not what the background does.

It simply allows the PC to recognize and have a knowledge of criminal organizations so they can use them to send messages - without getting robbed/roughed up/killed as would happen to someone without the requisite knowledge/background.

But to stop with the rehashing - the point is to talk with the player and make sure the DM and player are on exactly the same page as to what can and cannot be done. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with a feature that allows a PC a knack for ingratiating in with criminals that allows what the feature allows. Obviously YMMV.

 

[Oofta]

They don't get or NEED contacts around the world, that's not what the background does.

How else do they know who can send a message? What reason would a stranger have to ensure that a message is sent? Why do you assume that there's a Western Criminal Union magical telegraph station in every city?

It simply allows the PC to recognize and have a knowledge of criminal organizations so they can use them to send messages - without getting robbed/roughed up/killed as would happen to someone without the requisite knowledge/background.

But to stop with the rehashing - the point is to talk with the player and make sure the DM and player are on exactly the same page as to what can and cannot be done. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with a feature that allows a PC a knack for ingratiating in with criminals that allows what the feature allows. Obviously YMMV.

My point is that there are no criminal organizations that have the kind of reach that would allow such messages to be sent in my campaign world. As I said, I have no issue with people gaining advantages because of their backstory. I'm just glad we got rid of the hard coded features.

 

[hawkeyefan]

In the modern world, we regularly interact with people from around the globe. My D&D campaign world is not the modern world. It also doesn't necessarily excuse the miraculous coincidence that someone just happens to run into an old ally when they are in a city they didn't even know existed. If and when I see that in fiction? Yes, it makes the fiction less believable and it requires more suspension of belief. I don't care if it is a common trope or not.

So this came up in a recent thread... I think the Rule Zero thread... and I suggested that you, as a creative exercise, come up with an explanation that fits your setting and the player's desire.

These things need not be mutually exclusive. Honestly, it's not even that hard if one gives it more than the moment's thought that it takes to reflexively yell "NO" and cradle the map of one's homebrew world to their chest like a dying child.

Asking for connections to the setting before Session One, establishing the PCs as locals to the starting city, is a thing the players in the campaign I did that for have called out multiple times as making that city feel more "there." As GM, I don't handle in-play player-instigated additions super-well, so I mostly don't allow that (barring special abilities, of course) but I do ask for inputs from time to time, and I use what the players give me, and it's sometimes a challenge to make it all fit.

Sure, I get that. It can be a challenge. Skill level was mentioned, but I think sometimes it's more a matter of comfort level. I think one of the major factors with comfort level will often (but certainly not always) be how much has been determined beforehand. When the GM prepares the vast majority of things ahead of time with little to no input to the player, there's almost always going to be some discomfort with incorporating any ideas that may potentially conflict with that.

Not that that's the case here. You involved the players in your example... likely to help alleviate another factor that might make you less comfortable with this kind of thing.

I think the best thing is to try to work with the player to see if a way can be found. I actually find this more collaborative approach results in some really interesting play, as well as invested players, and more freedom for the players.

 

[Mort]

How else do they know who can send a message?

Because humanoids are not all that different and tend to function in similar ways regardless of distance, at least that's the theory.

What reason would a stranger have to ensure that a message is sent?

Depends on the situation or scenario, but they're not that hard to come by.

Why do you assume that there's a Western Criminal Union magical telegraph station in every city?

I don't, but if not, there is probably a guy with a horse/camel/dogslead who for sufficient motivation can get going. The feature doesn't say instantaneous - could take a while.

The REAL challenge is not having the feature completely obviated by magic. Because that's the MUCH more likely scenario.

My point is that there are no criminal organizations that have the kind of reach that would allow such messages to be sent in my campaign world. As I said, I have no issue with people gaining advantages because of their backstory. I'm just glad we got rid of the hard coded features.

It won't make a huge difference to me, as I said I see it more as RP aid than anything else.

 

[Oofta]

Because humanoids are not all that different and tend to function in similar ways regardless of distance, at least that's the theory.


Depends on the situation or scenario, but they're not that hard to come by.


I don't, but if not, there is probably a guy with a horse/camel/dogslead who for sufficient motivation can get going. The feature doesn't say instantaneous - could take a while.

The REAL challenge is not having the feature completely obviated by magic. Because that's the MUCH more likely scenario.


It won't make a huge difference to me, as I said I see it more as RP aid than anything else.

You're a criminal, someone who steals from others for a living. You're a low level thug in Boston, circa 1700. A complete stranger comes up to you and says "Can you get a message to Shi Deming in Beijing? He's my contact. I'd appreciate it." It's not going to happen.

Other benefits? Sure. We'll figure something out.

 

[Mort]

You're a criminal, someone who steals from others for a living. You're a low level thug in Boston, circa 1700. A complete stranger comes up to you and says "Can you get a message to Shi Deming in Beijing? He's my contact. I'd appreciate it." It's not going to happen.

Other benefits? Sure. We'll figure something out.

But that's the point.

The PC knows not to approach the low level thug who can't get it done, that's a rookie mistake for someone clueless or desperate. They (The PC) understand how things work, they know WHO to approach that would work, because as long as 1700 era Boston functions remotely like wherever they're from - they know how the system works. As for why would THAT person help them? Because the PC knows how to grease palms and get them to help.

It's not rocket science or magic!

Which, again, is the real issue. While the PC is trying to use his background and is being vetted by the DM for the non-magic ability, the Wizard casts sending and obviates the entire scenario.

 

[Oofta]

But that's the point.

The PC knows not to approach the low level thug who can't get it done, that's a rookie mistake for someone clueless or desperate. They (The PC) understand how things work, they know WHO to approach that would work, because as long as 1700 era Boston functions remotely like wherever they're from - they know how the system works. As for why would THAT person help them? Because the PC knows how to grease palms and get them to help.

It's not rocket science or magic!

Which, again, is the real issue. While the PC is trying to use his background and is being vetted by the DM for the non-magic ability, the Wizard casts sending and obviates the entire scenario.

So they know someone in Boston and how to approach them. Which you said they didn't need to know. There's also no mention of payment. That, and of course, the odds of getting a message to the other side of the world is slim and none.

If you don't have an issue with it, that's fine. I think it was a dumb feature. Magic can do impossible things, but sending a message by just asking nicely? Nah.

 

[Xetheral]

No, control is not an insult. It's literally what people are claiming they want. I don't know why folks would explain how they prefer to keep control over the setting, but then balk when it's pointed out as such.

The desire to control things is, in my opinion, at the heart of a lot of matters of playstyle.

(Bold emphasis added in both quotations.) The answer to the bolded question above is that the connotation of "the desire for control" is unusually dependent on context. I see it as entirely reasonable and consistent for someone to espouse a preference for a DMing style that features maintaining personal control over the game setting, but simultaneously object to descriptions of the style that seem to bear even a whiff of the bolded sentiment below:

So this came up in a recent thread... I think the Rule Zero thread... and I suggested that you, as a creative exercise, come up with an explanation that fits your setting and the player's desire.

These things need not be mutually exclusive. Honestly, it's not even that hard if one gives it more than the moment's thought that it takes to reflexively yell "NO" and cradle the map of one's homebrew world to their chest like a dying child.

 

[Mort]

So they know someone in Boston and how to approach them. Which you said they didn't need to know. There's also no mention of payment. That, and of course, the odds of getting a message to the other side of the world is slim and none.

If you don't have an issue with it, that's fine. I think it was a dumb feature. Magic can do impossible things, but sending a message by just asking nicely? Nah.

So messages are just not sent from where the PCs are? And it's not possible for a PC to have knowledge of how to utilize a message network, even outside their usual hangouts?

All the feature does is circumvent the fetch quest the DM would likely send the PCs on so they can send the message.

But, of course, magic already does that.

That's the real issue, IMO.