How big are the biggest cities in your campaign world?

[TwoSix]

If the players are going to act on it, it becomes more than casual scrutiny.

Ahh, some miscommunication. I never said "act on it". I said "show it off", which is very different.

Magitech is like tachyons in Star Trek. It's BS, but at least it's BS that shows we're trying for some coherence rather than the black box of "magic did it".

 

[Tonguez]

Eh...

Most of us are not actually urban planners, logistics experts, or economists. And players are apt to take it that things we show off are intended to be paid attention to as plot points.

Which means that if we show off our (talking through our hats) magitech infrastructure, that infrastructure may become a target of scrutiny or attack that'll show how hand-wavey it all really is.

soylent green is people?

 

[Umbran]

Ahh, some miscommunication. I never said "act on it". I said "show it off", which is very different.

Once you, the GM, show it off, you don't get to control whether the PCs decide to try to act on it.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Ahh, some miscommunication. I never said "act on it". I said "show it off", which is very different.

Magitech is like tachyons in Star Trek. It's BS, but at least it's BS that shows we're trying for some coherence rather than the black box of "magic did it".

soylent green is people?

Once you, the GM, show it off, you don't get to control whether the PCs decide to try to act on it.

I think that the thin veneer between “what the GM actually knows” and “what the GM can present as plausible” exists regardless of genre, and is always subject to being cracked by single-minded players who are determined to apply sufficient force.

The GM must, perforce, quickly establish a new veneer as a reaction - i.e. make something else up.

I mean, isn’t this just normal in rpgs?

 

[TwoSix]

I think that the thin veneer between “what the GM actually knows” and “what the GM can present as plausible” exists regardless of genre, and is always subject to being cracked by single-minded players who are determined to apply sufficient force.

The GM must, perforce, quickly establish a new veneer as a reaction - i.e. make something else up.

I mean, isn’t this just normal in rpgs?

I assume it is, but what do I know?

 

[TwoSix]

Once you, the GM, show it off, you don't get to control whether the PCs decide to try to act on it.

I'm not clear what point you're trying to make. It is clear you think I'm doing something wrong, I'm just not sure what that is.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not clear what point you're trying to make. It is clear you think I'm doing something wrong, I'm just not sure what that is.

I am not saying you are doing something wrong. I'm saying there is a risk involved in showing off and drawing special attention to things that hold a fictional society together, but that might not really hold up to scrutiny. Especially when you don't want to expect the PCs to actually interact with it in a meaningful way. Because player are perverse and will try to interact with it in a meaningful way.

Which may be fine. Or it may be players exploiting what you thought was "color" statements in a way that shows your million-person city that supposedly has been there for a thousand years is actually fragile like tissue paper, and should have fallen 997 years ago when someone sneezed.

 

[Umbran]

I mean, isn’t this just normal in rpgs?

Sure. But, as a GM, you get to pick where they are apt to try to crack things open. Maybe don't paint targets on things that you, as GM, don't intend to be targets, is all I'm saying.

 

[John Dallman]

I think that the thin veneer between “what the GM actually knows” and “what the GM can present as plausible” exists regardless of genre, and is always subject to being cracked by single-minded players who are determined to apply sufficient force.

This is why I prefer to know a fair bit more than I show. It makes creating scenarios more work, but knowing more about why something is there avoids glitches and makes the setting more consistent.

 

[Alzrius]

This is why I prefer to know a fair bit more than I show. It makes creating scenarios more work, but knowing more about why something is there avoids glitches and makes the setting more consistent.

Which is an excellent example of the merit of verisimilitude, i.e. that you're not just stringing together adventure hooks for the PCs, but creating an entire fictional world for them to explore.