Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Listening to old-timers describe RP in the 70s and 80s
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Iosue" data-source="post: 9176687" data-attributes="member: 6680772"><p>Division in the field is based on encumbrance, not even shares, so it's not an issue. The gems are held by the person or persons who can carry the gems without slowing the party down.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't follow. It's not "if the Caller says it, it happens." The Caller simply relates the information to the DM once the players have decided on their (individual!) course of actions. The Caller can't say, "The thief checks for traps!" if the thief has not expressed their intention to check for traps.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Irrelevant to the function of a Caller. Agreement is not required.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Session 0 problem. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I'll get into this below, but again irrelevant to the function of the Caller.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not an issue. The deadline for changing their minds is not the Caller speaking, but the DM adjudicating what has been communicated. If they tell the Caller one thing, but then change their minds while the Caller is telling the DM, they just say, "Wait, actually I'm going to do X." The Caller says, "Okay, Player A is doing X," and continue. They can even do that <em>after</em> the Caller has finished speaking, but before the DM starts adjudicating. It's not ideal, but no more of an issue than a character in combat saying, "I'm going to shoot my bow," picking up their d20, and then saying, "No, wait, I'm going to swing my sword."</p><p></p><p></p><p>So this is an interesting case, particularly if you value keeping player-headspace as close to character-headspace as possible, which I can fully understand and get behind. But then, I would just ask, how is this done without a Caller, in a way that maintains that congruity of IC and OOC knowledge? And why would that not work with a Caller? Because if it's just the player telling the DM, in full view and hearing of the other players, then I don't see the difference.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I resent the implication. And we were having such a good discussion.</p><p></p><p>The basic disconnect here is that you're still looking at the Caller as some kind of party leader who wrangles the other players, obtains a consensus, and make sure everyone's moving in the same direction. And that's simply not what I'm talking about. I don't want that in my group, either.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Iosue, post: 9176687, member: 6680772"] Division in the field is based on encumbrance, not even shares, so it's not an issue. The gems are held by the person or persons who can carry the gems without slowing the party down. I don't follow. It's not "if the Caller says it, it happens." The Caller simply relates the information to the DM once the players have decided on their (individual!) course of actions. The Caller can't say, "The thief checks for traps!" if the thief has not expressed their intention to check for traps. Irrelevant to the function of a Caller. Agreement is not required. Session 0 problem. I'll get into this below, but again irrelevant to the function of the Caller. Not an issue. The deadline for changing their minds is not the Caller speaking, but the DM adjudicating what has been communicated. If they tell the Caller one thing, but then change their minds while the Caller is telling the DM, they just say, "Wait, actually I'm going to do X." The Caller says, "Okay, Player A is doing X," and continue. They can even do that [I]after[/I] the Caller has finished speaking, but before the DM starts adjudicating. It's not ideal, but no more of an issue than a character in combat saying, "I'm going to shoot my bow," picking up their d20, and then saying, "No, wait, I'm going to swing my sword." So this is an interesting case, particularly if you value keeping player-headspace as close to character-headspace as possible, which I can fully understand and get behind. But then, I would just ask, how is this done without a Caller, in a way that maintains that congruity of IC and OOC knowledge? And why would that not work with a Caller? Because if it's just the player telling the DM, in full view and hearing of the other players, then I don't see the difference. I resent the implication. And we were having such a good discussion. The basic disconnect here is that you're still looking at the Caller as some kind of party leader who wrangles the other players, obtains a consensus, and make sure everyone's moving in the same direction. And that's simply not what I'm talking about. I don't want that in my group, either. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Listening to old-timers describe RP in the 70s and 80s
Top