Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 8472012" data-attributes="member: 7031982">I can see why you might be getting touchy at this point, but I wasn't arguing with you or tell you that you are wrong, as much as trying to lay out...and acknowledge as valid...where the differences in opinion are.I guess my comment about &quot;not trusting the players&quot; sounded hostile; that was poor phrasing.&nbsp; Because it's really a difference between two styles: &nbsp;- In one version, players are given &quot;cues&quot; of how their character should be roleplayed, even if there's no mechanical reinforcement.&nbsp;- In another version, it is 100% up to the player to decide what their character thinks and does.Version 2 seems to bother some people, which I expressed as &quot;trusting&quot; other players.&nbsp; I.e., if the orc tries to intimidate a PC and the DM rolls dice for the orc and rolls well, the player should act suitably intimidated.&nbsp; And a failure to do so would be breaking the social contract.&nbsp; All I'm saying is that if that's how it works, then either the player adheres to the social contract or they don't.&nbsp; And if they do, then all the DM has to do is narrate intimidating behavior, and the player should play along.But, at the same time, I can understand how some people...even if I'm not one of them...might like the dice providing those nudges to the direction of the narrative, and that it has nothing to do with trust.&nbsp; So I apologize for phrasing it that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bill Zebub, post: 8472012, member: 7031982"] I can see why you might be getting touchy at this point, but I wasn't arguing with you or tell you that you are wrong, as much as trying to lay out...and acknowledge as valid...where the differences in opinion are. I guess my comment about "not trusting the players" sounded hostile; that was poor phrasing. Because it's really a difference between two styles: - In one version, players are given "cues" of how their character should be roleplayed, even if there's no mechanical reinforcement. - In another version, it is 100% up to the player to decide what their character thinks and does. Version 2 seems to bother some people, which I expressed as "trusting" other players. I.e., if the orc tries to intimidate a PC and the DM rolls dice for the orc and rolls well, the player should act suitably intimidated. And a failure to do so would be breaking the social contract. All I'm saying is that if that's how it works, then either the player adheres to the social contract or they don't. And if they do, then all the DM has to do is narrate intimidating behavior, and the player should play along. But, at the same time, I can understand how some people...even if I'm not one of them...might like the dice providing those nudges to the direction of the narrative, and that it has nothing to do with trust. So I apologize for phrasing it that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification