Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 6857310" data-attributes="member: 6778044">So in a futile attempt to stop the madness, here's my short list of what I think is relevant:The only thing that matters is what occurs at your table.The situation played out as described. After the fact, the players said, "whoa, how did that happen?" - The DM explained why/how it happened. - The players can respond with, "oh, OK. I don't like it, but I can go with that. It makes sense" or "You know, based on how we've been playing the game that's just not fair." - The DM moves forward as is, or retcons based on the consensus at the table.That's what should happen when there's confusion or a disagreement. Every. Single. Time.That's what happened here. The DM explained his position, the players went with it.I've explained in great detail why I feel that what happened would also occur in a similar manner at my table.I've tried to make it clear that it's very situational, and that the answer for that one situation doesn't always apply to all situations. Trying to condense things down to "all players must state every action with great detail" or "all suits of armor include the gauntlets" or other one-size-fits-all answer, at least based on my posts, is not understanding my posts. In this case, with the information provided about what the character and the player knows, it works for me. If it was obvious that the character would have known better, despite the attentiveness or statements of the player, it would be different. That doesn't mean you have to agree with me. This type of discussion will never yield a consensus simply because there are too many variables, too many different approaches to the game. That's just fine. The only consensus that matters is the one at your table. This is an interpretation of somebody else's game. In many cases it's largely irrelevant as a comparison to a game you might run as a DM, because you would do things differently. You would have described things differently, you would have interacted differently, you might have had different checks, you undoubtedly would have envisioned exactly what was going on differently. But it's extremely interesting to expand your perspective to see what others think. It can be helpful in your game, either as a DM to come to a conclusion as to whether a scenario like this works for you or not, and if it does how you'd handle it so it's fair. As a player it's also good to consider that not everybody will have the same perspective, and what you might do to avoid a situation like this, or how you might react, or react differently in the future.My descriptions aren't an attempt to convince anybody that my interpretation is correct. They are simply to show that we don't all interpret things the same way, we envision what is happening differently, and that there are many 100% valid interpretations of what is right here. I approached those descriptions in what, based on my personal experiences, seemed the most logical, while making the fewest assumptions possible. Again, somebody else would have different conclusions because they have different life experiences and assumptions.The discussion has moved largely beyond constructive, helpful input to petty unhelpful attacks. I don't know if there's a way to lock a thread, but I would certainly recommend it. I think there's a lot of very interesting, helpful, and enlightening discussion in this thread. But at this point it has grown so long that nobody new is going to go through it to glean anything from it. They'll jump to the end and see the useless attacks and attempts at humor. While amusing, they really don't help anybody learn anything which is too bad.Ilbranteloth</blockquote>

Verification