Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8826417" data-attributes="member: 6921763">So a player best have a very complete backstory lest they leave out details that could cause conflict of player vs PC knowledge during gameplay?&nbsp; Seems like a high expectation for players, in that case.So, in your games, the DM knows the PC better than the player?Some might argue that you cannot reasonably separate player knowledge from PC knowledge 100%.&nbsp; But I think that is fodder for another thread entirely.That's just the thing that many DMs here have given up on:&nbsp; policing how the PC thinks, talks, and acts.&nbsp; According to the 5e rules (or, if one prefers, guidelines), deciding how the PC thinks/talks/acts is the player's duty, not mine as DM.&nbsp; If I ever ask for clarification about WHY a PC is saying/thinking/trying to do something, it would be out of simple curiosity of wondering what they are hoping to accomplish and to possibly hear something from the player that might add to the fun, memorable story.&nbsp; It is never to tell the player:&nbsp; &quot;Sorry, that's not how your character would act/talk/think.&quot;&nbsp; A fictional reason is readily available for any of these - and I, as DM, don't want that extra duty so I leave it to the players.&nbsp; Sometimes the players choices are optimal, sometimes they are suboptimal, sometimes (either way) they can earn Inspiration.And I think several people here think this &quot;challenge&quot; from the DM is one that gets in the way of smooth game flow.&nbsp; I know from past experience of having run this way.&nbsp; Once I dropped worrying about player motivations behind PC actions, our 5e game became much, much more enjoyable for the players at our table and, especially, for me as DM.&nbsp; Clearly, YMMV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8826417, member: 6921763"] So a player best have a [I]very [/I]complete backstory lest they leave out details that could cause conflict of player vs PC knowledge during gameplay? Seems like a high expectation for players, in that case. So, in your games, the DM knows the PC better than the player? Some might argue that you cannot reasonably separate player knowledge from PC knowledge 100%. But I think that is fodder for another thread entirely. That's just the thing that many DMs here have given up on: policing how the PC thinks, talks, and acts. According to the 5e rules (or, if one prefers, guidelines), deciding how the PC thinks/talks/acts is the player's duty, not mine as DM. If I ever ask for clarification about WHY a PC is saying/thinking/trying to do something, it would be out of simple curiosity of wondering what they are hoping to accomplish and to possibly hear something from the player that might add to the fun, memorable story. It is never to tell the player: "Sorry, that's not how your character would act/talk/think." A fictional reason is readily available for any of these - and I, as DM, don't want that extra duty so I leave it to the players. Sometimes the players choices are optimal, sometimes they are suboptimal, sometimes (either way) they can earn Inspiration. And I think several people here think this "challenge" from the DM is one that gets in the way of smooth game flow. I know from past experience of having run this way. Once I dropped worrying about player motivations behind PC actions, our 5e game became much, much more enjoyable for the players at our table and, especially, for me as DM. Clearly, YMMV. [/QUOTE]

Verification