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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8010900" data-attributes="member: 16814">I'm confused.  Genre appropriateness has been presented as an input into GM adjudication of action in the sense of if it's not present the GM can fail the declaration without engaging the action.  Like, not allowing someone to find a ray gun in the baron's closet, or asking a dragon to give away it's horde.  These are not genre appropriate to a 5e game and so the GM can use that heuristic to not consider them and fail them without consideration.  You say that genre appropriateness isn't a useful test of action declarations because there's no requirement for the player to adhere to genre in their declarations and beside, the GM can refuse those actions anyway.  That seems to miss the point because there wasn't a claim that the player was beholden to genre in action declarations, but that it was a consideration for how the GM would adjudicate that action declaration -- a claim you seem to agree with at least in outcome in that non-appropriate declarations should be made to fail.  Now, that said, a player that presents genre inappropriate action declarations consistently or even just a few egregious ones will get an out-of-game discussion.  In game, as in with the mechanics, there's nothing about an inappropriate declaration that isn't easily handled by refusing to allow success of the action.  This holds across many game systems.  Genre appropriateness is a heuristic for the GM to use in adjudicating the action.  In a game like 5e, where the GM decides, it's an input to auto-success or failure (ie, if a check is even called for) or to how an ability check is resolved (what ability check, what DC, etc.).  Genre-appropriateness needs to guide the narration of the result as well.  It's a GM side heuristic for both determining if an action requires adjudication or refusal, and what possible narrations of the outcomes might be.For example, if a 1st level fighter without any assistance or magic, is declared to be jumping to the moon, the GM can choose to refuse this action declaration based on being genre inappropriate.  The attempt would not happen, and the GM should, at least, take a moment out-of-game to discuss it with the player as to why it was refused.  The GM might also use the same-heuristic to allow the action, but declare it automatic failure, and narrate a result, like, "you try as hard as you can, but just look silly jumping up and down but only getting a few feet off the ground.  In the meantime, you've made a lot of noise and, <clatter> it appears someone or something is coming to investigate.  What do you do?"If the GM has some established in the fiction reason to consider the action, then that might control.  If the fighter happens to be standing where the GM has revealed that there's an environmental effect that a jumping person will be teleported to the moon, then the adjudication of this action changes.  The established fiction has provided a way to avoid genre inappropriateness, and the action is consistent with that established fiction.  Viola!  The 1st level fighter now 'jumps' to the moon in a way that is both grounded in the fiction and is genre appropriate.</blockquote>

Verification