Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7627183" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Of course i understsnd the difference between in-character and out of character. That is why the flat out permission for PLAYERS to try and break rules even to casting spells with slots unless the GM has tracked it well enough to say &quot; no&quot; just boggles my mind.&quot;Players are ALLOWED to try and break rules. &quot;You are trying to draw a distinction between which rules the player should be required to follow and not.I simply see it this way- the player is required to follow the rules of the game they are playing. It's not ALLOWED to try and break rules until you get caught. That keeps it simple. We dont have to all track each other cuz we did not agree that you can break rules until you get caught, that you can keep your character casting spells until somebody asks about it. So, for instance, somebody whose character cannot fly doesnt say out loud ** as PLAYER to the GM &quot;my character flies across the chasm&quot; if they do not have a character who can do that. We dont see whether or not it will slip by and get away with it. Because at our tables it is considered and agreed to be false that &quot;Players are ALLOWED to try and break rules. &quot;Meanwhile, it's also true at our table that if the rules we play by say we wont do things - like PvP - then we wont ask to do them to see if we can slip that one by either. Instead, we do at times discuss changes and tweaks to the rules so that the rules we play by serve us, instead of keeping rules that dont and&nbsp; encouraging or endorsing the &quot;dont get caught&quot; style social contract.But hey, each to their own.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7627183, member: 6919838"] Of course i understsnd the difference between in-character and out of character. That is why the flat out permission for PLAYERS to try and break rules even to casting spells with slots unless the GM has tracked it well enough to say " no" just boggles my mind. "Players are ALLOWED to try and break rules. " You are trying to draw a distinction between which rules the player should be required to follow and not. I simply see it this way- the player is required to follow the rules of the game they are playing. It's not ALLOWED to try and break rules until you get caught. That keeps it simple. We dont have to all track each other cuz we did not agree that you can break rules until you get caught, that you can keep your character casting spells until somebody asks about it. So, for instance, somebody whose character cannot fly doesnt say out loud ** as PLAYER to the GM "my character flies across the chasm" if they do not have a character who can do that. We dont see whether or not it will slip by and get away with it. Because at our tables it is considered and agreed to be false that "Players are ALLOWED to try and break rules. " Meanwhile, it's also true at our table that if the rules we play by say we wont do things - like PvP - then we wont ask to do them to see if we can slip that one by either. Instead, we do at times discuss changes and tweaks to the rules so that the rules we play by serve us, instead of keeping rules that dont and encouraging or endorsing the "dont get caught" style social contract. But hey, each to their own. [/QUOTE]

Verification