Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 7732283" data-attributes="member: 6775031">No, I don't. The player is the one actually making the decision, albeit from the character's perspective and based on what the character observes (i.e. they are role-playing). If the character was capable of independent thought, we wouldn't need the GM to convey that information to the player.I see the confusion. That's not where I was going with this. I meant the existence of clouds or not to be a simple observable fact, like whether it's raining or whether there's a tree nearby."There's some cloud, but it's not raining and there are patches of sunlight breaking through", would be a very reasonable answer to the question of whether or not clouds are visible. Other good answers would be "It's overcast", or "There are some very nice cumulonimbus over to the east, but it's otherwise mostly clear", or even "No, there are no clouds visible right now". As the GM, it's (generally speaking) not your job to worry about how that the environment may affect any scheme that the players may or may not have. Your job is to describe the environment, play the NPCs, and adjudicate uncertainty in action resolution. If the player needs more detail before deciding whether or not to attempt something, they can ask for clarification about what they observe, or even ask your opinion on whether the character might think that it's a reasonable course of action (if they think that the limiting factor in choosing a course is in your description). For example, if they want to climb a wall, they may ask what it's made from in order to determine whether it's feasible, and then ask you if you think think the character would think it's climbable (if your description otherwise does not address that point).If the GM is honest in their assigning of the odds, and not simply attempting to further some ulterior motive, then the results of the die roll should be indistinguishable from internal causality for all practical purposes.A game based on random chance and the GM's interpretation of internal causality allows the players to engage with the game through role-playing, by pretending to be their characters, rather than worrying how their actions may retro-actively change details of the world which should have been previously established if the world had been following internal causality. When the GM meta-games in order to make interesting things happen, the players are forced to treat the game as a game in order to play it.</blockquote>

Verification