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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Harzel" data-source="post: 7451660" data-attributes="member: 6857506">Perhaps not intended, but that seems rather condescending.  Your version of roleplaying is not the only one that is valid.  In particular, there is (literally) a world of knowledge that PCs have that the players do not.  It is quite possible to envision most improvements in player skill as improved understanding of how the PCs' world works - things that virtually every PC would know.*  Certainly that's not the only way to look at it, but IMO it is a reasonable one.It's fine to play low level characters as naive greenhorns, but I think it is also fine to assume that most really stupid or foolish characters would be washed out of the adventuring life very early (probably prior to level 1) via death, dismemberment, or just a recognition that they were just not cut out for that demanding a way of life.  It is possible to reasonably reflect a low mental stat, or incorporate other interesting flaws or foibles without having the character behave in ways that frequently threaten their and/or the party's survival.As noted, no 'mind meld' is needed to explain the player having learned things that every PC would already know.* So, although it would be rude, inane, and pointless to mention say this in any actual situation, in the context of this theoretical discussion, one could even posit that it is playing a PC as more than usually ignorant of common (fictional world) knowledge that is poor roleplaying.</blockquote>

Verification