Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7408110" data-attributes="member: 42582">From the PCs' perspective, s/he doesn't know where the map is (but hopes it is in the study, where s/he is searching); s/he does't know whether or not there is a secret door in the wall (but hopes there is, because that is her only chance for escape); s/he does't know that there is no forcefield blocking the ditch (but obviously believes there is not, or else wouldn't try to jump across it).I can tell you, when (as my PC) I was hoping to meet a knight of my order as I travelled along the riverbank, I was thinking in character as Thurgon, Knight of the Iron Tower.That has no bearing on how the resolution system should work, though.I would say, speak for yourself!There is no reason why rolling dice in combat is any less immersive than in other contexts; or conversely, if you take an approach where the GM rolls all the dice and tells the players the outcome, that can be done in combat too.Actually, that doesn't "naturally" follow. Different tables take different views on this. For instance, here is an extract from an actual play report from my 4e game:So there you have an example where the PCs don't know what has happened to the paladin, but the players do know that, at the least, he is not dead, and probably not captured either.But in any event, in the three examples I mentioned - the map, the secret door, and the presence/absence of a forcefield across the ditch - the player doesn't know.Let's put to one side that I think what you describe is, literally at least, impossible - you, in your mind, are picking up dice, rolling them, writing down numbers on sheets of paper, eating and drinking snack food and beverages, etc.Putting that to one side, what disparities are you talking about? There are no disparities in any of the examples I've described.And even in the missing paladin example, I don't think the player of the fighter in my game found it any harder to bracket his knowledge of why the paladin was being narrated as missing (ie because the player couldn't make it to the session) than he did to put aside his knowledge of the fact that he was sitting at a table playing a game.And as I already posted upthread, one of the biggest burdens on my own inhabitation of a player character is that I can't know what I think and feel (eg who are my friends? what are the customs around here? what are the rites of my church?) until I ask the GM to tell me. I find that quite dissociating.You seem to think I'm interested in word games. I'm not. I'm interested in the actual experience of RPGing. I want to do a certain thing. Personally, I've had no trouble doing that thing for 30-odd years (with the odd contrary experience along the way), and so I don't think I'm "harshly self-restricted".I mean, what is it to you that I have a particular taste in RPGing? Apropos of which, . . .Your (c) is exactly what I've referred to as a focus of play being on taking moves that will trigger the GM to relate the fiction that s/he has established in his/her notes, or is establishing as if it were in her notes. That's not what I play RPGs for, either as GM or player.</blockquote>

Verification