Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6569796" data-attributes="member: 6775031">I'm trying to follow along. Are you saying that none of the natural laws are known, until a PC checks them? Or just the magical laws, which nobody (including the DM!) would have any pre-conceptions about?In either case, not only are you handing narrative power over to the players (!), but you're tying that power directly into the skill check of the characters! If the player wants it to be possible to channel firedrake essence into a ring, then that theory works because the character knows a lot about magic. My character knows a lot about magic, therefore he knows that my theory is true.As opposed to my (much more traditional) method, where that action either is or is not possible, and a successful skill check would allow a character to know which it is (and, if it is possible, how to actually do it), but the narrative control - whether or not it is true - is wielded exclusively by the DM.I mean, even if you did want players to have some narrative control over the setting, it just seems like a bad idea to tie that into skill checks. Since narrative control is a player resource, you probably want to share that equally, rather than saying that stronger character in-game also has more power across the meta-game.</blockquote>