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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7501775" data-attributes="member: 97077">I think inherent in your assumptions is that I'm being stingy with information. If anything, I'm generous with it. I can give you a direct example from one of my one-shots of how this all plays out because I think whatever you have in your head is not lining up with the reality of the play experience. Here is a description of the environment from one of the early chambers of the dungeon, which they know to be a ruin from a fallen civilization of orcs:"A stone door amid debris from the ceiling and an archway bounded by dimly-glowing runes are the apparent means of entering or leaving this desolate chamber. Beyond the archway, a spiral staircase delves downward into darkness. A suit of dusty steel plate armor stands against the east wall, a sheathed longsword at its side. It holds a large shield emblazoned with many red eyes which eerily shift to observe any movement in their field of vision."Above, per How to Play, I tell them where they are, what's around them, presenting them with the basic scope of options that present themselves. From there, they can describe what they want to do. A player might say, "Without going any closer to the armor, I try to get it in the light of my torch and examine that weird shield in more detail, drawing upon my study of Orcish history to identify it." At this point, I may decide if an ability check of some kind is appropriate. If I just say he or she succeeds or ask for a check, the result is:"This is the storied Shield of He Who Watches which once adorned the arm of the High General of Chernoggar, the realm of the orc war god, Gruumsh. It was said that the shield could see what he could not - except for his own hubris."So, I've described the environment, the player has described what he or she wants to do, I've adjudicated it and narrated the result of the adventurers' action. The player likely explains what he or she recalls to the rest of the group. At this point, nothing has changed in the environment, so I may recap what has already been stated and ask another player what he or she wants to do. That player might say, "Not to be outdone, I try to recall what I might know of that fine armor, given my experience as a blacksmith." Again, the DM decides if that's a success, fail, or if a check is required. Let's say it's a success and now I narrate the result of the adventurer's action:"This appears to be the handiwork of Zodagh, a bastard of the orc god Ilneval, who was first among the war-smiths of Chernoggar. It is said the Son of Strife imbues his bastard's works with the strength to resist sword and spell both, and that his spirit gives them life... of a kind."Then we start the loop again by describing the environment (probably just a recap at this point) before perhaps asking someone else "What do you do?" What I'm not doing here is describing the environment as per the first description I provided, asking for a bunch of checks, then giving out the next two bits of information. That skips over the player's role. They also don't need the more detailed information about the armor or shield to act with agency. They can do whatever they want in the context of the scene with this creepy armor and shield plus the glowing runes. The more detailed information may certainly help, however, given that it may suggest the shield is extraordinary in some way, if not magical, and that the armor may be animated and thus a threat. This encourages players to engage more fully with the exploration pillar in my experience since it can give them an edge.Is that how you imagined things playing out in my game in your head? If so, would you still object to this approach to the play experience? If not, what did you imagine this would be like?</blockquote>

Verification