Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8377818" data-attributes="member: 86653">As a faux-medieval magician, your assumed character would have no idea what more than half of those things are. As for the rest, it hasn't come up in a game yet, so it doesn't matter.Any spell effecting a target allows them some kind of save. As for the white room theorycrafting...it hasn't come up in an actual game so it doesn't matter.He would know. You don't. Just like your character would know everything there is to know about their daily life, the culture they're in, and the general world around them...yet you as a player know practically none of it. Odd how you're not digging in and arguing about your lack of knowledge in regards to those things. When/if it comes up in an actual game, we can talk about it. But until it actually matters in the game, it doesn't matter.I consider it patently ridiculous that as a player you seem to insist on perfect knowledge of all permutations and possibilities before you're even willing to entertain the idea of playing a different way. It's honestly absurd.Right. But you have not. You started caring about these things literally yesterday. Your character's knowledge surpasses yours as a player. How are those situations usually handled? When the player wants their character to do something that their character would know wouldn't work, would be a social faux pas, etc, the GM reminds them of the situation but leaves the player their agency and lets them do what they want with the information the character would have. Again, that you're insisting on perfect knowledge of this instead of any of the rest is really odd. Why does the distance your armoured athlete matter more than the world they inhabit?The character would know. But there's no guarantees. Randomness happens. Jumping has come up in games before. We usually handle it by basing the DC/% on the distance the character wants to jump and the relevant factors at the time. The players know the mechanics of the real world, generally, and we default to that unless there's magic involved. So everyone's carrying around the mechanics in their head and we don't need to rely on someone else's imagination.The mage would know. The mage would know that they could throw lightning to yon tree in the field their teacher taught them the spell, they wouldn't know precise measurements. Also, the mage isn't the player. Again, there are vast swathes of knowledge that the character possesses that the player does not. I don't see why the precise measure of a spell's range is any different.Exactly. So make the best judgement you can with the information given. Base your decisions as much on the character and world as possible, because that's a lot closer to what the character would actually do. The character wouldn't know. Like experienced players with new 1st-level characters fighting an ooze for the very first time. They all start talking about torches, fire damage, and not using bladed weapons. Um, excuse me. When did your character learn about that?The GM usually only has to answer the question once. Once it's been answered, that's the rule going forward unless it needs to be changed. Yes, generally speaking, the GM in games like that try very hard to be consistent. That's the goal. But no one's perfect.LOL. Or it's proof that the player wants to game the system and play to the mechanics instead of the character and world.Right. So leverage that expertise. Use it. Why would you defer to some game designer who isn't an expert in your field about how your field works? You wouldn't. Like a psychologist objecting to the terrible way mental health and mental illness are handled in games like Call of Cthulhu. The expert on the field handles that topic. Not the book.Most of the objections presented don't really matter. People have to make decisions without perfect understanding every second of every day.If everything is of utmost and absolute importance, then nothing is. If someone feels the need to argue about everything, they're a troll.Which is why if there's a point of contention, you roll for it.Ultimately someone has to be in charge. But there's no reason they need to be a tyrant about it. Everyone's there to have fun. Except the people there to argue.Literally happens all the time in life. Why shouldn't it happen in a game. Like a character sneaking into a castle to steal something. Neither the player nor the character would have any idea if they'll be successful or not. In most D&D games the GM would ask for a stealth check up front. If the character succeeds, the player goes ahead with the plan. If the character fails, the player...inevitably...backs out of the plan, or tries really, really hard to. The player wouldn't know 5 feet out of the tree line whether they were being stealthy. They'd find out when it actually matters. You roll when there's a chance that an actual guard would spot you, not before.Most of this conversation reminds me of that kind of situation. Endless questions about the particulars of the situation inside the castle that the player/character literally would not know until they get there, but a bizarre insistence that they would know and not only that but that the GM is somehow cheating for not telling the player up front. Like, dude. You will find out when your character would actually find out. You don't know if it's Cloudy-Eyed Klaus on patrol tonight or if it's Keen-Eared Kristen. You're a wizard who knows a spell? Okay, here's your character's understanding of the spell. That's the information the character would have. Make your decisions based on that. Not the game system.Likewise, it doesn't mean they're a bad idea.</blockquote>

Verification