Why do DM's like Dark, gritty worlds and players the opposite?

[Hussar]

No, I think the premise of the question is flawed, so I'm dismissing the question. There's a difference.Because what you wrote applies so well to your own posts.

Buh? Then why are you quoting me?

The idea was posted that a player's children really get a kick out of narrating their abilities.

Derren raised the point that it was still only using their abilities, not actually challenging the player.

I wondered what the problem was.

Perhaps you are reading something that I'm not. I'm a bit lost now what your issue is. What question is flawed?

The only question I asked was, "Is there a problem with only enjoying your character's in game abilities". I asked why some people think it is superior to challenge the player and not the character.

Where is the flaw in these questions?

 

[Thunderfoot]

Hassar - I don't think The Shaman read through the posts. He wasn't the original poster who challenged your child's imaginative use of skills, but he did hop on the band-wagon.

In response, I think it's awesome he can do that - my kids (now 20 and 16 (as of today)) have been playing since they were old enough to chew on the dice.

I guess I just miss the infancy of the game when player thoughts equaled character action, and a really good player could be brilliant and act like a moron, and a half-wit player (though rare - but did exist) could, after some time, really start putting the gray matter to work in order to bring themselves up above their normal operational mode.

Is it less imaginative that your son can incorporate the skills into his narrative, by no means, in some ways, it might be more so. However, it has been my experience (YMMV) that the reverse is the norm, where players have gotten so used to skill checks that they forget what that actions entail.

Some people describe the following scenario as "pixel bitchin'" but, it is now possible for a player to walk into a room and say I search the room - roll a die and either succeed or fail, without really thinking about what that search could mean. Meanwhile we used to walk into a room and have to specify what was searched and how it was searched - no rolls, role playing. I can see where both are appropriate and where a good DM would require the search check to be targeted, but RAW doesn't actually state it has to be, so in an imperfect world (and I think we've proved this one is) there is always some room for debate. (But then again around here I guess that's half the fun.)

BTW - My example was using 3.x skills, successes over failures is worse IMO as the rule just plays wonky...

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

The problem with a high powered yet darkly dangerous world is it quickly leads some types (like me) to wonder how the hell normal people survive in a world where roving packs of beholders jump you as you leave the shower.

Who needs suspension of disbelief when you have a Bathrobe of the Archmagi and a Showercap of Teleportation?

 

[Garthanos]

Buh? Then why are you quoting me?

The idea was posted that a player's children really get a kick out of narrating their abilities.

Derren raised the point that it was still only using their abilities, not actually challenging the player.

I wondered what the problem was.

Perhaps you are reading something that I'm not. I'm a bit lost now what your issue is. What question is flawed?

The only question I asked was, "Is there a problem with only enjoying your character's in game abilities". I asked why some people think it is superior to challenge the player and not the character.

Where is the flaw in these questions?

The chess game of character movement (Chess a game my son has played since he was a little over 3) and resource game of managing dailies and encounters and healing surges seems to be an element of challenging a player and the original post I was responding to was asserting that "powers" were somehow repressing imagination and inducing imitative fantasy.. I was pointing out that the powers seemed to inspire imagination in my experience.

We play pretty liberal (exploiting page 42 of the dmg a lot) and both I and my son when he DM's (hes learning 4e but has played freeform roleplaying since dice chewing age too...we just didnt bother with dice then) give bonus's when the situation arises based on how well the description given merges with the described scene whether the thing used is a basic attack a power or a skill use or whatever. The Green Flame Blade attack by the way was described as a heated blood splattering from one enemies severed head towards the adjacent one.. and he described the Kobolds response to it vividly as well facial expressions etc.

I feel the Shaman was saying that it is hard to ever just challenge one... both player ability and character ability are so used in tandom that the assertion that something being "just" the players ability or just the characters is not very reasonable he wasnt even agreeing with Derren *of the intentionally offensive version bashing sig* - who I generally have on ignore. For instance my son arranged his character to be in the position to use that ability by choices and using other abilities of the character and so on and so forth and similar things... my son considered the ranger of the party taking too much damage a personal failure or was it a failure of his character? Actually the other player had the dice rolling so badly against him that I dont know what could have been done to prevent that...

 

[Ariosto]

I can't speak for Derren as to his/her particular issues. I can guess that the relevance to this thread would be that players tend to have access to greater "character abilities" in higher-level games (which some people oppose to "dark, gritty worlds").

As a general principle, that it is better to challenge a player's skill than to have outcomes determined independently of that is pretty much a truism in the world of games! Managing chance can be part of that skill, of course.

It's pretty widely agreed in theory that an RPG player's will should (perhaps with rare exceptions such as a mesmerizing spell) not be infringed upon in choosing a character's actions. However, it's a practical and an aesthetic question just where the line between character ability and player volition lies. For instance, what should be made of "mental abilities" such as intelligence, wisdom and charisma scores?

In all my experience prior to 3e -- which mostly involved "character skill system" games, starting with Traveller and RuneQuest -- the emphasis was on challenging the players rather than "challenging the characters" (which is rather a euphemism, really). What I read in the 3e books was still consistent with that tradition, but apparently players in the 2e era had already begun to overturn it.

D&D of course had gone into the 1st Advanced and "BECMI" editions without any systematic treatment of such matters. Dungeons quite often tested the players' cunning, and included clues and even jokes that depended on real-world knowledge. So, it's a pretty radical change when D&Ders start to hold forth that dice rolls ought to replace such traditional features. It would not be quite as startling in the context of some other games.

 

[The Shaman]

I feel the Shaman was saying that it is hard to ever just challenge one... both player ability and character ability are so used in tandom that the assertion that something being "just" the players ability or just the characters is not very reasonable . . .

That was my point exactly.

 

[The Shaman]

It's pretty widely agreed in theory that an RPG player's will should (perhaps with rare exceptions such as a mesmerizing spell) not be infringed upon in choosing a character's actions. However, it's a practical and an aesthetic question just where the line between character ability and player volition lies. For instance, what should be made of "mental abilities" such as intelligence, wisdom and charisma scores?

A topic worthy of its own thread.

 

[The Shaman]

Who needs suspension of disbelief when you have a Bathrobe of the Archmagi and a Showercap of Teleportation?

Don't forget the soap on a rope of protection versus evil +4.

 

[The Shaman]

Character ability v. player volition: INT, WIS, CHA

Mis-post. Nothing to see here. Move along, citizens.

 

[Betote]

Spidermans moral compass means he holds back big time when fighting street thugs... sort of a way to sneak in a very similar power rewind that DC has to do more explicitly. Supermans experience with kryptonite color x has left his bodies ability to absorb certain bandwidths supressed so he can no longer do that xtra add on power which was only necessary for the last plot that was too over done anyway ;-). Doctor Strange gets periodic power rewinds too.. so it isnt just DC.

Well, I didn't want to get specific because comic books (specially mainstream, Marvel/DC ones) experience a lot of creative changes. What you're describing is, in fact, changes in the tone of the comic itself, not a variety of stories within the same genre.

My point was that, in grim & gritty, you try to appeal to the players' sense of danger, whereas in high fantasy/colorful, you're targeting the players' sense of wonder.