Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6306109" data-attributes="member: 42582">Perhaps.If you are GMing with players who don't care to engage the ingame situation via their PCs, and who just &quot;roll into town&quot; hoping to meet with the king, what is wrong with their PCs just meeting with the king? What is the point of tryng to establish &quot;ingame consistency&quot; for players who don't care about it?So you're agreeing with me, then, that it is not the case that no reasonable player would ever expect his/her PC to be able to meet and influence a king.Yes. My point is that, if you're going to close off avenues in the way that various posters have advocated for, why spend precious play time on it? Just tell the players it's not an option and move on to something that they can affect through their action declarations.The notion of &quot;in-game merits&quot; was used @upthread, by [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION]. I find it a little bit puzzling - what are the ingame merits, independent of the mechanics whereby those are ascertained and adjudicated?For instance, how can we tell if the PCs are clever and witty enough to talk their way into an audience with the king - certainly something that is feasible and genre-consistent - other than by framing the situation, accepting the action declarations, and letting the dice roll?I don't think this is especially unique to you. I think it is quite widespread.This is not what I, in my game, use mechanics for. I use the mechanics to determine the outcomes of action declarations, via (i) build and framing mechanics, and (ii) resolution mechanics. Predictability and consistency with &quot;everyday assumptions&quot; and genre are achieved primarily via no one framing situations, or making action declarations, that violate those things.This goes back to the issue of bad faith. Is the player insincere in believing that this is feasible within the fiction? In which case, what is the underlying cause of the insincerity? But if the player is sincere, then my preference is to use the action resolution mechanics. That's what they're for.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6306109, member: 42582"] Perhaps. If you are GMing with players who don't care to engage the ingame situation via their PCs, and who just "roll into town" hoping to meet with the king, what is wrong with their PCs just meeting with the king? What is the point of tryng to establish "ingame consistency" for players who don't care about it? So you're agreeing with me, then, that it is not the case that no reasonable player would ever expect his/her PC to be able to meet and influence a king. Yes. My point is that, if you're going to close off avenues in the way that various posters have advocated for, why spend precious play time on it? Just tell the players it's not an option and move on to something that they [I]can[/I] affect through their action declarations. The notion of "in-game merits" was used @upthread, by [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION]. I find it a little bit puzzling - what are the ingame merits, independent of the mechanics whereby those are ascertained and adjudicated? For instance, how can we tell if the PCs are clever and witty enough to talk their way into an audience with the king - certainly something that is feasible and genre-consistent - other than by framing the situation, accepting the action declarations, and letting the dice roll? I don't think this is especially unique to you. I think it is quite widespread. This is not what I, in my game, use mechanics for. I use the mechanics to determine the outcomes of action declarations, via (i) build and framing mechanics, and (ii) resolution mechanics. Predictability and consistency with "everyday assumptions" and genre are achieved primarily via no one framing situations, or making action declarations, that violate those things. This goes back to the issue of bad faith. Is the player insincere in believing that this is feasible within the fiction? In which case, what is the underlying cause of the insincerity? But if the player is sincere, then my preference is to use the action resolution mechanics. That's what they're for. [/QUOTE]

Verification