Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6844626" data-attributes="member: 6701872">I'm afraid I don't understand what you are saying - there was no out-of-character table talk in my recounting of this scenario. Are you saying that the excited player's statement would be treated as out-of-character despite being an in-character statement, and that then the player of the character skilled with Riddling could choose to use it or not, and if did choose to use it we'd pretend the information came from an in-character source that wasn't the character of the player making the statement?What skill is sufficient to blurt out a random thought?Are you saying that you set up an expectation by which all in-character statements must first be vetted through out-of-character table-talk in order to determine who is allowed to say them? Because that is what I seem to be reading here - since any declaration of the player in my scenario being declared as inappropriate without saying all statements are inappropriate if made without approval, requires the assumption that 1) the character of the interrupting player doesn't have even more riddling skill than the other mentioned character, and 2) that the blurted out guess is actually the right solution.</blockquote>