Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8306271" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, now we're into Oberoni Fallacy territory.&nbsp; Because, for every player who has a good experience with this, there are many who don't.&nbsp; Note, a player gets the same experience without having the DM initiate it if the player chooses to bring it up to the DM.&nbsp; IOW, you can get the same positive results - the players have a world outside of their characters that feel real and that push and pull - without having the negative results where the players turtle up because of DM's being too heavy handed.I mean, sure, if you, as the DM, suggest the notion to the player and the player is all for it, then groovy.&nbsp; But, that's rarely what DM's mean by &quot;consequences&quot;.&nbsp; Player is playing their character, DM feels that whatever the player is doing doesn't fit with the DM's conception of the element that the player brought to the table and then has &quot;consequences&quot; that means that the DM is forcing the player to fit with the DM's interpretation.Put it this way.&nbsp; Player does something that you feel would have consequences and their patron would step in.&nbsp; Player says, &quot;No, that shouldn't happen&quot;.&nbsp; Do you immediately back off?&nbsp; Is the player in control here at all?&nbsp; Or is 100% from the DM?&nbsp; The DM &quot;controls the patron&quot; after all.&nbsp; So, does the player's interpretations of an element that the player introduced into the game have any impact at all?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8306271, member: 22779"] But, now we're into Oberoni Fallacy territory. Because, for every player who has a good experience with this, there are many who don't. Note, a player gets the same experience without having the DM initiate it if the player chooses to bring it up to the DM. IOW, you can get the same positive results - the players have a world outside of their characters that feel real and that push and pull - without having the negative results where the players turtle up because of DM's being too heavy handed. I mean, sure, if you, as the DM, suggest the notion to the player and the player is all for it, then groovy. But, that's rarely what DM's mean by "consequences". Player is playing their character, DM feels that whatever the player is doing doesn't fit [u]with the DM's conception of the element that the player brought to the table[/u] and then has "consequences" that means that the DM is forcing the player to fit with the DM's interpretation. Put it this way. Player does something that you feel would have consequences and their patron would step in. Player says, "No, that shouldn't happen". Do you immediately back off? Is the player in control here at all? Or is 100% from the DM? The DM "controls the patron" after all. So, does the player's interpretations of an element that the player introduced into the game have any impact at all? [/QUOTE]

Verification