Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8245154" data-attributes="member: 42582">I only mentioned it because you did.Are you asserting that there are unique solutions here, like 2+2 =4? I can't tell.What I will add is that only one thing occurs to me is not the same thing as a unique solution. The point of a unique solution is that anyone who considers the parameters and reasons correctly will arrive at it.I chose this example because it's low-hanging fruit: there is so much written about what was or was not inevitable in relation to the First World War that I think it amply demonstrates my point about a lack of unique solutions.But the more general point is that there is almost always more than one plausible way things can unfold. Even with your factions - suppose that the party's action involves a lost kitten. How do we know that the faction leader doesn't have a soft spot for lost kittens, dating from his/her own childhood, which affects how s/he responds to what the PCs do?The answer seems to be we know that because the GM hasn't thought of it. And when the players learn that the faction leader is as heartless towards lost kittens as s/he is to everyone and everything else, then the players are learning that fact about what the GM thought of.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8245154, member: 42582"] I only mentioned it because you did. Are you asserting that there are unique solutions here, like 2+2 =4? I can't tell. What I will add is that [i]only one thing occurs to me[/i] is not the same thing as a unique solution. The point of a unique solution is that anyone who considers the parameters and reasons correctly will arrive at it. I chose this example because it's low-hanging fruit: there is so much written about what was or was not inevitable in relation to the First World War that I think it amply demonstrates my point about a lack of unique solutions. But the more general point is that [I]there is almost always more than one plausible way things can unfold[/I]. Even with your factions - suppose that the party's action involves a lost kitten. How do we know that the faction leader doesn't have a soft spot for lost kittens, dating from his/her own childhood, which affects how s/he responds to what the PCs do? The answer seems to be [I]we know that because the GM hasn't thought of it[/I]. And when the players learn that the faction leader is as heartless towards lost kittens as s/he is to everyone and everything else, then the players are learning that fact about what the GM thought of. [/QUOTE]

Verification