Argyle King
Legend
Nod. Isn't that kind of the point of D&D? I know two roleplayers from college who went on to be philosophy professors . . . philosophizing about "Theory of Mind" (can you understand another POV? what is understanding? etc.) and role playing aren't exactly antithetical pursuits.
I feel that's true. Now, generally speaking, I will say that I do tend to build characters that I have something in common with because it is easier to make decisions based on things I know. However, I've also (as already said elsewhere) played characters who had to little to nothing in common with me or my way of thinking.
As the out-game-entity known as DM, I also have some preferences. There are some game styles and systems which I prefer over others. However, when I'm playing the part of something which exists inside the game world, I put myself in the mind of that piece. What does that piece see? ...hear? ...smell? What experiences has that piece had? How has it been impacted by nature and/or nurture? It's the same process that we -as humans- do every day when we make decisions. I do not have any of the in-game pieces make choices or take actions which are based upon knowledge that those pieces would not have.
Sometimes the natural course of the game and the actions of the players lead to failure. Failure need not always mean death, but sometimes it does mean death (or serious injury.) I give the players enough knowledge and enough power so as to be competent enough to make their own decisions.