The Quantum Ogre Dilemma

[prabe]

See, I don't believe that PCs are more likely to encounter adventure-worthy events based solely on the fact that they are controlled by a player. Their choices, and the events in the setting, make that determination.

I believe we are playing a game where the PCs encounter adventure-worthy events. Either they are exceptional for doing so, or they aren't; either says something about the setting.

That treats all the participants as having equivalent responsibilities. I just can't see that as being true.

Since @Reynard was responding approvingly to my post, please find where I said all the participants in a TRPG have equivalent responsibilities.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I just make sure there's interesting stuff to see and do in general that the PCs can learn about and engage in. No need to push it because PCs are involved.

But is this realistic? Is there interesting adventure worthy stuff all around all the time in the real world? I don't think so. Lives of PCs in D&D are far more filled with adventure than any person's in the real world. And similarly if all these interesting events happened at equal frequency to everyone than they do the the PCs, the life expectancy of 4 HP commoners would be measured in days.

Like for example what are the odds of a dire owlbear breaking loose from a trader of exotic animals and starting to wreak havoc just as the PCs visit the market? Realistically, it must be extremely low, or the market would be deserted as no townsfolk would ever go there in fear of freak animal related lethal incidents that occur routinely. But if you randomise it with such low odds, it will basically never happen to the PCs. But such thing is interesting and possible. So the GM can just decide that it happens whenever the PCs visit the market.

 

[Desdichado]

See, I don't believe that PCs are more likely to encounter adventure-worthy events based solely on the fact that they are controlled by a player. Their choices, and the events in the setting, make that determination.

So, are you suggesting that if the players decided that they wanted to avoid all of the weirdness and go open a bakery in the quietest, least weird town in the Realm, that that'd be OK with you? You'd run that for them?

This is part of the reason this issue, and many others like it, struggle to get discussed very fairly; these absolutist statements about playstyle. Getting to feel superior because you maintained purity of playstyle is a pretty poor consolation prize for a fun game. Which is exactly why most people don't actually practice, or want to, absolute endpoints on the spectrum.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes. As we have discussed a hundred times, this is a place where we give our opinions.

Of course. I just prefer an "I think", "I feel", "IMO", or the like when discussing personal opinions regarding debatable statements. Helps with clarity and avoiding acrimony.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But is this realistic? Is there interesting adventure worthy stuff all around all the time in the real world? I don't think so. Lives of PCs in D&D are far more filled with adventure than any person's in the real world. And similarly if all these interesting events happened at equal frequency to everyone than they do the the PCs, the life expectancy of 4 HP commoners would be measured in days.

Like for example what are the odds of a dire owlbear breaking loose from a trader of exotic animals and starting to wreak havoc just as the PCs visit the market? Realistically, it must be extremely low, or the market would be deserted as no townsfolk would ever go there in fear of freak animal related lethal incidents that occur routinely. But if you randomise it with such low odds, it will basically never happen to the PCs. But such thing is interesting and possible. So the GM can just decide that it happens whenever the PCs visit the market.

PCs seek these things out, and they are on average somewhat better equipped to survive them than most others. As they become stronger, they seek out bigger and more dangerous situations, or their reputation leads to becoming involved in bigger events.

I don't like to artificially inflate the odds of exciting events. I prefer to present the world to them and allow the players to decide where they go and what they do. It's the sandbox way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So, are you suggesting that if the players decided that they wanted to avoid all of the weirdness and go open a bakery in the quietest, least weird town in the Realm, that that'd be OK with you? You'd run that for them?

This is part of the reason this issue, and many others like it, struggle to get discussed very fairly; these absolutist statements about playstyle. Getting to feel superior because you maintained purity of playstyle is a pretty poor consolation prize for a fun game. Which is exactly why most people don't actually practice, or want to, absolute endpoints on the spectrum.

It's never worked out that way in real life (I mean really, I'm not the one providing an extreme scenario here), but if the players want to open a business I have rules for that, and yes I would happily run it.

It's not about feeling superior. It's about advocating for my preference and defending against those who would criticize it or doubt my sincerity in striving for it. I'm a pretty literal guy. I say what I mean, and if it's misinterpreted or I misspoke I apologize when that's brought to my attention.

 

[Mort]

See, I don't believe that PCs are more likely to encounter adventure-worthy events based solely on the fact that they are controlled by a player. Their choices, and the events in the setting, make that determination.

I think there is a pretty big chicken-egg issue here.

Most people don't become adventurers. The ones that do? Generally it's because they've encountered what you call an "adventure-worthy event" and run toward it instead of away - as PCs tend to do (and very few other sane people).

And then they keep running toward them - that's what PCs generally do. Because, usually, once your involved things happen fast and you stay involved.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

PCs seek these things out, and they are on average somewhat better equipped to survive them than most others. As they become stronger, they seek out bigger and more dangerous situations, or their reputation leads to becoming involved in bigger events.

I don't like to artificially inflate the odds of exciting events. I prefer to present the world to them and allow the players to decide where they go and what they do. It's the sandbox way.

I don't think sandbox needs to be static. Interesting events can still happen, and it is perfectly fine for the GM just to decide that some of them happen when the PCs are around. Like would the sort of situation like I described, a wild monster breaking loose from animal handler in a city just never happen in your game?

 

[Desdichado]

It's never worked out that way in real life (I mean really, I'm not the one providing an extreme scenario here), but if the players want to open a business I have rules for that, and yes I would happily run it.

Fair enough, I guess. I would not happily run it. I'd either quite, and tell them they're on their own, or I'd throw all kinds of interesting things at them anyway.

It's not about feeling superior. It's about advocating for my preference and defending against those who would criticize it or doubt my sincerity in striving for it. I'm a pretty literal guy. I say what I mean, and if it's misinterpreted or I misspoke I apologize when that's brought to my attention.

I don't advocate for my preference, except at my own table. I'm happy to discuss my preferences and talk about them with anyone interested. But advocacy is where I draw the line. If you don't already like playing that way, you're not going to, and advocating for it is only going to pit people against each other.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think there is a pretty big chicken-egg issue here.

Most people don't become adventurers. The ones that do? Generally it's because they've encountered what you call an "adventure-worthy event" and run toward it instead of away - as PCs tend to do (and very few other sane people).

And then they keep running toward them - that's what PCs generally do. Because, usually, once your involved things happen fast and you stay involved.

That's what I'm saying. PCs makes choices that lead to more adventure. NPCs do too, in a verisimilitudinous world IMO.