Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6517330" data-attributes="member: 87792">Context matters. Also the question is not "Could they" but "would they"? Could the GM introduce 58 dragons into the bottom level of a dungeon? Yes. Would they? Not under normal circumstances if they are behaving like adults.The fundamental principle is simple. The GM's notes are not authoritative. All that's authoritative is that which has been established at the table. You are not allowed to change any details that have been established either explicitly or implicitly. You are however allowed to build on them with things you think would fit rather than subvert.What's the fundamental question. You can't change the nature of the door - if it's a bank vault probably not. If it's an inn and you think it has a keyhole and nothing's been established (such as a deadbolt on the inside) then yes. It doesn't change the nature of the door.And this would really change the nature of the iron box, subverting its purpose. The only game I've seen where PCs would do this is Leverage - and they'd do that via flashback scenes so there was a causal mechanism for the crack both having been there all along and no one spotted it. (Leverage is a game about a team of con artists).In a street scene? Probably. In the middle of a clean room? Certainly not - it changes the nature of the room.Describe the NPC. Not on one who took pride in their appearance. Someone wearing old rags? Probably.What has been established about that NPC? If the GM has not already mentioned whether they are bearded or clean shaven (or implied it through other cues such as gender or membership in an organisation) then it's something not established. So you're adding consistent detail with that which has gone before. A ridiculously long beard on the other hand would have been one of the first things noticed so is implicitly not there if the NPC has been physically described.Unlikely. If the voice doesn't get remarked on it is assumed to be unremarkable.Unlikely. That would be remarkable. (Exception made for Leverage and a flashback scene with the Grifter buying them a few rounds until they fall asleep).What sort of building/guild? A seamstress' guild or a tannery? Almost certainly. A wizards' guild? Probably not as it would be remarkable.All else being equal, yes. Many towns are built on rivers and if it hasn't been established (for instance by a map) that it isn't then you can assume it is.Why not? Unless it's established otherwise.Utterly remarkable. No.No. It's a change about where the authoritative map of the setting is - whether it's strictly in the GM's hands or whether the GM is director but the map is the one on the centre of the table.</blockquote>

Verification