Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should players be aware of their own high and low rolls?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8830154" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>It could well be just a matter of power dynamics. I know that if I disagree with the DM under such an agreement, I could be judged as acting in bad faith and uninvited from future games. So in that scenario, I'm better off deferring to the DM's personal feelings on whether something is "metagaming" or not, even when I strongly disagree with them, if my goal is to keep playing. (This could be true even if I also believe that "metagaming" is cheating.) It doesn't remove the possibility of or any actual disagreements that may arise. It just means the DM always wins in those situations since they have all the power, so you may as well not fight it. That's effectively a veto on action declarations since there are certain action declarations that are forbidden which have to be determined as they may arise and two people acting in good faith could easily disagree.</p><p></p><p>The above will also serve as my response to your last post as well [USER=23751]@Maxperson[/USER], and will be my last word on this tangent. You may not believe that it's a veto, but it clearly is by any measure in my view, and setting up that condition in the first place lends itself to more possible disagreement than a game without this table rule. Given this downside, and no real upside as I see it, I would never implement it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8830154, member: 97077"] It could well be just a matter of power dynamics. I know that if I disagree with the DM under such an agreement, I could be judged as acting in bad faith and uninvited from future games. So in that scenario, I'm better off deferring to the DM's personal feelings on whether something is "metagaming" or not, even when I strongly disagree with them, if my goal is to keep playing. (This could be true even if I also believe that "metagaming" is cheating.) It doesn't remove the possibility of or any actual disagreements that may arise. It just means the DM always wins in those situations since they have all the power, so you may as well not fight it. That's effectively a veto on action declarations since there are certain action declarations that are forbidden which have to be determined as they may arise and two people acting in good faith could easily disagree. The above will also serve as my response to your last post as well [USER=23751]@Maxperson[/USER], and will be my last word on this tangent. You may not believe that it's a veto, but it clearly is by any measure in my view, and setting up that condition in the first place lends itself to more possible disagreement than a game without this table rule. Given this downside, and no real upside as I see it, I would never implement it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should players be aware of their own high and low rolls?
Top