Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7612303" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Sort of? But, while dealing with different types of exposition is important in a novel I don't know what that has to do with players rolling knowledge checks in a DnD game. I don't see the connection you are trying to draw here. It feels like talking about athletics checks and you mentioning how Nintendo designed Mario's jump. Yeah, they might be analogous, but it doesn't seem to apply to the discussion.  Sorry, I try not to ignore people's points. So, I end up continuing to post and talk. But, I am tired of retreading the same ground over and over, so I'm going to skip. But you seem to think that "different game" is something like DnD 3.5 or ADnD, or ODnD... none of which had specific rules language about this either. But, the same rules and assumptions were used in later editions, while your style was expected in something like ODnD where player skill was paramount. Before things like arcana and religion were added to the game. These design principles stayed with the game though. Seriously? That required ALL CAPS. Yes, I am aware of your position on rolling the D20, actions, skills, goal and approach and all that. We've been discussing for over a month, you've mentioned it once or twice. But my statement seems to be good in terms of application. They must describe themselves calling upon their memories or education (which may or may not lead to an intelligence check using arcana proficiency) in order to change from "Well I think this" to "Well I know this". Why do you think that this idea is not supported in 5e? Just because it isn't stated in the rules? There are a lot of things not directly stated in game rules that still apply to those games. Especially in "roleplaying" games where one is supposed to enter into the "role" of someone else. In that case it is generally considered bad form to use knowledge your character would not have or use, since it would break the "role"See, most players are adults who can handle things without any prompting. But not all players work on the same wavelength. In fact, if I am unable to establish any limits, then nothing prevents one player from listing off the entire history of The Xanathar, ruining the potential discovery by players with no knowledge of that history. Nothing prevents them from attempting to bring real world knowledge of physics or chemistry into a game where the other players do not want it. It is my job as DM to make sure the story we are all building together is fun, interesting, and coherent. That may mean occasionally telling a player that they do not know the location of the Heart of Gith, which could end the war between the Githyanki and Githzerai. In fact, considering the player has never established any connection with the Outer Planes and grew up on a farm, I may wonder why they know about the history of the Gith and their war with the Mindflayers. The player may be wanting to share their cool and shiny new knowledge because they read a new book, but it isn't something their character just immediately knows for no reason. Yeah, it will be great for them acting dumb on very rare occasions to get a single inspiration token that they can then use to ensure advantage on a roll when they decide to enact one of their "Devilishly clever plans".</blockquote>

Verification