Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Riley37" data-source="post: 7612338" data-attributes="member: 6786839">Cherry-picking example: in “White Plume Mountain”, there is a puzzle involving a series of numbers, and which of those are prime numbers. I pondered the numbers for maybe a second, then stated the correct answer. My PC, a Folk Hero paladin, was unaware of prime numbers (and possibly fuzzy on multiplication tables). White Plume Mountain was written with the assumption of Pawn Stance, so I played accordingly. (See also, this exchange between Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford during the filming of Star Wars. Hamill notices a continuity issue, and wants to fix it; Ford responds gruffly with “Hey, kid, it ain’t that kinda movie.”)When did that idea or value emerge? The idea that using my knowledge of prime numbers would be “bad form”? It wasn’t the guiding principle of that puzzle in White Plume Mountain.D&D developed from putting a name to tokens on a miniatures battlefield: this is a Squad of Archers token, this is a Heroic Warrior token - hey, what if this Heroic Warrior was named Fritz? (Two rounds later: “They've killed Fritz! Those vermin!”) There’s a long, winding road from that level of characterization, to games such as Fiasco or Masks.Thank you for naming that particular player motivation. We’ve discussed the player motivation of “I want an easy victory over earth elementals” as a reason for declaring that the barbarian buys scrolls. The motivation of *showing off lore* is different from power gaming, and therefore responses from the DM - and from fellow players - might differ accordingly. “Shut up, your PC doesn’t know that” might provoke an even worse outcome, when the motivation is impressing one’s fellow players. “I’m glad you enjoyed that book, but look around the table: do your fellow players want spoilers?” might be more effective. (That question cuts to the root of the problem, more directly than a discussion of who in the setting knows about the githyanki.)</blockquote>

Verification