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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 943535" data-attributes="member: 4937">"Metagaming against a stupid ruling is not quite the same as general metagaming, but it can be annoying when the DM actually has a reason for the ruling."I'll agree with that.There is some difference between ruling that sandwichs don't exist and ruling that mortar and pestles don't exist.  Mortar and pestle is pretty much a necessary precursar for bread.   It doesn't take much thought between smashing nuts between two stones and a mortar and pestle.   I'd expect simple versions mortar and pestle - a hollowed out rock and a length of a log - to be invented some time before fire.So, I agree that Tsyr's DM is an idiot, but I don't agree that the solution here is to be spiteful.  If the DM is to arrogant to reconsider the idea that anchors and mortars and pestles don't exist, then I doubt being spiteful is going to fix anything."I'm completely opposed to the Celebrim solution; people should not be randomly penalized for thinking."Fungasite, I don't understand that at all.  What random penalty am I imposing?   What I suggested is neither random nor a penalty.   First, it implies universally to any attempt at invention.  Secondly, I'm no more trying to penalize someone than I am trying to penalize someone when he says 'I stab the villian with my sword'.   "Ok, roll a to-hit check to see if you are successful."  The intelligence check is just a means of arbitration, just like saving throws, skill checks, etc.  Anytime you want to attempt something difficult, there should be an appropriate means of assessing whether or not the attempt succeeds.   If there is not, then I'm penalizing people who invested resources in attributes that help them succeed in that particular area.   If I let everyone metagame freely, the player with a 6 int character would have the same chance of inventing something as the player whose character was a 20 int expert who spent alot of points in various professions and crafts because he wanted his character to be an 'inventor'.   Moreover, with a die roll, I as a DM would be forced to arbitrarily tell players "No, you just can't do that."  You don't even have to take my word for it as a DM with 20 years experience.   Read any article you like on the art of Dungeon Mastering, and you will read that it is better to give players some chance of doing what they want (even if it is remote) than just go around telling your player 'no' all the time.  With a bit of time to formalise the rules, I could probably assign DC's to broad classes of items and then even the DC would not be assigned by fiat (except in the sence that someone decided what the DC should be in the first place).And I might add that the mechanism I proposed is basically not that much different than the rules governing new inventions in GURPS (page 186-187 of the basic rules).  I suppose you think that those rules are random penalties being assessed as well?My basic point is this.   I as a DM might well have very good reasons why sandwichs don't exist in my world.   If some player is walking around at a fair or market and says "I'd like to buy a Sandwich...", I'd first have to inform him:1) The Earl of Sandwich doesn't exist in this world, and there isn't even a word in your character's vocabulary for the thing you are asking for. 2) None of the vendors are offering meat between two peices of bread.The skilled player - the sort of player that I enjoy working with - doesn't start metagaming at this point and invent the sandwich.  The skilled player modifies his mental idea of the world and his character to include 'People don't eat sandwiches.', and asks "What sort of fare is being offered by the food vendors?"   Now this _is_ a good question, and a good player would have made this sort of question at least once before ever trying to buy anything.   I would probably respond with something like: "You see nearby a vendor offering 'kalash' which is a dish of minced lamb usually served on lettuse or cabage leafs.   Another vendor is offering kidney pies.   The scent of fried breads wafts from not far away.  People normally carry with them bowls and cups, usually hanging from thier belts.   When they are hungry that sit down at boards which have been laid out on trestles beside the way.   Wandering hawkers come by with sacks of bread or jars of beer or wine or kettles of soup balanced across thier back on a stave.  You can here the hawkers crying out thier wares and at a nearby table, two are engaged in a spirited and only superficially cordial debate over the merits of thier respective wines.  The soup is usually ladled onto bread or into bowls if people have provided them.   You don't see anyone eating or drinking while standing up, nor do you see anyone eating alone."The point being, I'm the sort of DM that would spend a few hours inventing a local ethnic cousine and would expect a player with a character from a given ethnic region to incorporate those tastes into his character - or perhaps decide that his character is a picky eater or some other bit of inventive personality.   I don't expect that character to invent hamburgers and french fries, nor do I consider that thinking or imaginitive.</blockquote>

Verification