Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="maddman75" data-source="post: 4999140" data-attributes="member: 2673">This is really the entirety of my point.  A player takes an action.  It might be justified for story reasons.  It might be because he felt that would be 'true' to his character.  It might be because its getting late and his wife is going to be on his case if he doesn't get home soon.  Who knows?All I know is that you're basing whether or not someone is playing an RPG on what is going on inside a player's head.  The structure of the rules, and apparently, what the other players are doing, is totally irrelevent.What if someone takes an action because they think "This is what my character would do AND I think it would make a cool part of the story."Another factor is that these are not mutually exclusive at the table.  One player may be making choices because of where he wants the story to go, and another is making choices because of what he thinks his character would do.  The two of them in the same group is not a problem.  In fact the only way you would even know why someone makes the choice they do is to ask them, and if they were lying there's no way you could tell.So more questions.  If all the players make their choice based on character, while the GM is introducing conflicts and adjucating in the interest of a good story, are they playing a roleplaying game.  What if some of the players use character and some use story?  And here's the real kicker, because its how the vast majority of people game IME - what if they're taking into account both character and story?  They grumble and complain about going to save the orphans because their cold blooded mercenary doesn't have much reason to do so, but they go ahead and do it because, well, that's what the group's doing and they don't want to ruin the game.  Or their noble paladin wouldn't really tolerate adventuring with an unrepentant theiving pickpocket, but they merely get preachy and tolerate his presence, because it would make for a bad story for the paladin to be off by himself while the rest of the group goes on the adventure.  (It would still be a story, sure, but it wouldn't be very much fun for the paladin, or the GM, or the rest of the group).I've found far more disruptive behavior justified with the cry 'But its what my character would do!' than anything else.  Having players that 'pay attention to story' really means players that consider how much fun everyone at the table is having.  Because that's what us story guys really mean - everyone at the table doing what they can to make sure everyone has a fun time.</blockquote>

Verification