Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7392182" data-attributes="member: 29398">Exactly!And now that we've agreed on this, let's go one step further:If the presence of that secret door had been known about all along by the DM, what would have been done differently in play/occurred differently in the fiction than what in fact transpired?&nbsp; Then run the same question past every single instance of something being introduced out of the blue by a successful action declaration...I ask this because if the answer at any time is anything - anything - other than &quot;nothing at all&quot; then as far as I'm concerned the whole game is invalidated.&nbsp; As soon as something is introduced later that would reasonably have had effects earlier had its presence been known about earlier then either a) that thing being introduced is invalid (less-worse option) or b) any and all previous play that would have been affected is invalid (utterly unacceptable).The best option is to never allow this to happen in the first place...and to achieve this requires solid pre-authorship of the setting by someone, and that someone is almost without exception going to be the DM.Sure it is, it's just that the flapping is being done by someone other than the DM: in this case, a player aided by her dice.It's contentious not because of what it does to the future but because of what it will inevitably at some point end up doing to the past, and how that change to the past should affect the present but cannot.This kind of action resolution isn't relevant to the discussion.&nbsp; Physical-setting-affecting action resolution is.Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7392182, member: 29398"] Exactly! And now that we've agreed on this, let's go one step further: If the presence of that secret door had been known about all along by the DM, what would have been done differently in play/occurred differently in the fiction than what in fact transpired? Then run the same question past every single instance of something being introduced out of the blue by a successful action declaration... I ask this because if the answer [B]at any time[/B] is anything - anything - other than "nothing at all" then as far as I'm concerned the whole game is invalidated. As soon as something is introduced later that would reasonably have had effects earlier had its presence been known about earlier then either a) that thing being introduced is invalid (less-worse option) or b) any and all previous play that would have been affected is invalid (utterly unacceptable). The best option is to never allow this to happen in the first place...and to achieve this requires solid pre-authorship of the setting by someone, and that someone is almost without exception going to be the DM. Sure it is, it's just that the flapping is being done by someone other than the DM: in this case, a player aided by her dice. It's contentious not because of what it does to the future but because of what it will inevitably at some point end up doing to the past, and how that change to the past should affect the present but cannot. This kind of action resolution isn't relevant to the discussion. Physical-setting-affecting action resolution is. Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification