Who said anything about getting into the sewage? The description says the building is over collection pools. Thus, unless I'm misunderstanding what is meant by that, characters should be able to stand on the lip and see underneath, which is all that I intended. And if that is what is done, then you should be able to see anyone trying for the street or roofs as well.
Ah, you must mean that:
The structure was built over a group of collection pools in the city’s early sewers, and when its interior was gutted, the floors collapsed into the septic system below.
I was not quite certain if I got that right, but i understood it as there were sewer pools and when the building was put into it's present state, some floors collapsed into those pools basically connecting it with the sewers? Also because of this:
It is clear that the structure overall is unstable as the foundation all around the perimeter is cracked and filthy sewage water serves as a moat warning away any who would not want to ruin a perfectly good pair of boots.
Which to me meant that the foundation basically sunk/collapsed into the collection pools, and now sewage water(from the former pools) is basically a moat.
Basically a bit like this.In combination: I don't really think you can simply duck down and see clearly across, since the floors collapsed down into the sewers. One would need to, if possible, crawl in through the sewage and take a look around. Also, you said:
Ran, check on Granite and see if there is anyway to approach the building from underneath.
If there's a secret exit, a floor board or hatch opening downward, it should be nigh impossible to see from the lip unless someone is currently using it, even if the building miraculously is built on stilts and we could see across clearly(which I don't think we can).
My reading suggested that the building, due to partial collapse, is more or less "fused" with the sewers/collection pools. Which is why my initial understanding was that you wanted us to go into the sewers and look for an ingress point below ground for a two-pronged assault/cutting off that escape path.
If your reading is correct, by all means let GM assume I take a quick glance under the building while we're heading to the front entrance.
But if you're worried about them escaping, you should probably not stand idly next to Ikit while he looks for possible secret doors, and instead cover the other side of the building to make sure they don't climb out a ground-level window on the back while we enter from the front.
The gm only mentioned one door, so if you guys check out around the exterior, able to see underneath or not, then in here is obviously the way into the rest of the building and the best place for someone to try and enter, unless you want to try going into a window.
And I guess I can see your point on the sinking into the sewage, but that doesn't make much sense unless the entire section around the building is in a depression, otherwise, the entire district (or however far the sewers go) would have non-functonal sewers backing up every drain.
The collection pools, by neccesity, must be a low point in the system. However high the water level is the collection pools is how high the sewage water is in the entire system.
This post mentions two entrances, which you can also see on the map in the header. I'm guessing the initial door mentioned is the one to the South since we didn't see the shack until we walked around. Then a door to the shack was mentioned later.
Either way, there's another entrance to check out, which is what Ran and I are doing.
Aye, the GM mentioned two doors. I even referenced the link to the relevant post in the latest gameplay post by Ran. It's the first sentence even:.
We checked the shed first, what is supposedly the main entrance of the building was so far not looked at closely - something Granite and I will remedy shortly.
Since the district is a slum, I would not bet on sewers functioning properly in the surrounding area. There is, by description, sewage surrounding the building.
But as collection pools had been built here, as you say, by definition, it must be a low point in the sewage system, that is, a natural depression compared to the surrounding area. You point it out yourself :)
I haven't seen the map. The gm uses google docs which is far too slow to use on a 2g phone connection.
Well, I'm sorry about the misunderstanding. I missed the mention about a second door and thought we were at the one and only door, hence my belief that there was a secret door in the room (since there would need to be some way of getting back there). This completely alters what I would have done.
For starters, I wouldn't be looking for a secret door, instead, I'd be at the main door while asking you two to keep an eye on the sides (and underneath if possible).
No worries...it's still a reasonable assumption that this part is somehow connected to the main complex, possibly with a secret door-(maybe even as an emergency exit)
We just roll with things as they are, if there's trouble at the front gate, you'll be over quick enough ;)
Quite frankly the mods explanation is a bit confusing, I probably should have made it more clear on the door situation :-)
I will post in Gameplay now. Work appears to FINALLY be under control so my posting rate should increase moving forward.
So here's the deal :
Today GMT+2, 3:25 am we welcomed my first born into the world. 16 July 2017
Welcome to my partner in geeky crime. Aldrèa
-Posted with Wayfinder
Congratulations! Best of luck for Aldrèa!
Grats!
Now you get to go on a real life adventure path called Parenthood! :)
I am slowly working my way out of my DM board break. I want to add information to the Campaign Info Tab before I move us forward.
Sorry for the delay guys but not to worry, we'll be up and running again soon enough!
Tomorrow I will update this Thread. Life continues to conspire against my free time!
Playing in 20+ games and running 26 (soon to be 27) is time consuming. Outside of the boards I have a fairly busy work schedule and of course a life!
Often I find that if I fall behind in updates, I need to make time to simply update a Discussion Thread to inform the PCs of a particular game that I am either going to be posting later in the day or week or will be on a break form the boards for one reason or another.
To save time updating so many damn threads I am going to open this thread and link all of my DM aliases (and PC aliases) to this thread to inform people as to status.
Of course if people feel the need to ask other questions outside of PbP feel free to do so but mainly this will be a thread dedicated to ensuring that my PCs know my status and to assure everyone that even though I may have some absences away from the boards (or particular games) that new thread will be up to date with my status.
@GM: Mentioning just in case: Only Ikit's turn is up, since there's two groups of Foes, and he already acted.
Just in case you just skimmed gameplay and figured you are waiting on us :)
@GM: Mentioning just in case: Only Ikit's turn is up, since there's two groups of Foes, and he already acted.
Just in case you just skimmed gameplay and figured you are waiting on us :)
No just backed up on Ruins of Azlant prep. I'll be posting likely tonight on this one.
All good, I'm not in a hurry, just thought I'll mention it to be safe.
Even if Ran realized that there's someone behind the group, Zhai sounds like she has things under control. So he presses forward to secure this floor, at least. Doesn't help if Natalya jumps out a window upstairs, but we concluded beforehand that time may be important, so he's not trying to waste any by checking the groups back unless called for(plus no ranged weapons so...not keen on jumping down into sewage.)
Hi guys. Sorry for being absent, couldn't access my posts until now.
-Posted with Wayfinder
Can Granite try and smash the door with his swing? As in, feet front, slam into the door? He may loose momentum from that, but I think I could extend my spear and let him hold on, then help to make it to the platform?
Can Granite try and smash the door with his swing? As in, feet front, slam into the door? He may loose momentum from that, but I think I could extend my spear and let him hold on, then help to make it to the platform?
Indeed he could!
Granite, if you succeed at that Acrobatics check without Ran's help, make a CMB check at a DC of 20, give the roll a +4 bonus for the weight of your body being added to the swing into the door.
While that's a good idea, with an acrobatics of +4 and a CMB of +0, I don't like my chances of success. You could give it a shot though.
Well, if the door DC is 20, with a CMB of +1 that'll take a long while to get through...but till gotta try in-character :P at least until I get a good hit in and figure I can't break it open like this.
Well, I meant you could try swinging across to bash the door open. Your acrobatics is better than mine, and that would give you a +5 CMB vs door.
Hum, nope...after seeing the DC I'm happy I managed to get across the first time around ^_^ Not tempting fate by swinging back and forth trying to crash into the door ;) plus if you had been "stranded" in the middle, I could have used my reach weapon to help you pick pick up momentum again.
Even if you borrow me the grappling equipment I may only get a single try :) so....thanks, but no, I'll try to bypass it the other way.
Well, I'm back to fewer hours, so I should be better about posting now.
It's not my turn yet I notice, but all Zhai will be doing is to get up on the rafters. If any movement left, she'll then move closer to where goblins are.
Just in case.
Wait a moment, isn't it supposed to just be Ikit, then GM post about goblin actions, then all of us go? Am I missing something?
Also, you said before that I could swing on a rafter to get across the pit, so why do I suddenly need rope to just climb on top of the rafter?
Wait a moment, isn't it supposed to just be Ikit, then GM post about goblin actions, then all of us go? Am I missing something?
Also, you said before that I could swing on a rafter to get across the pit, so why do I suddenly need rope to just climb on top of the rafter?
I didn't want to bot you with a DC 25 skill check so I went the next best route plus Ikit might need the rope.
The Goblins shot as part of round 1 and another Goblin did something off screen. If you want to ret-con your bot, you certainly can!
As I had said what I was doing for the round, I don't really consider it a bot (which I had dkne cause I thought only Ikit was supposed to be posting). I was just wondering what was up with that is all.
Personal experience says it should be easier to just grab a rafter and pull myself up than either swinging for a long jump (second hardest but quickest) or using rope (definitely the hardest and probably multi-round option) though. Makes it feel awkward to have the DCs reversed.
I live once more. Update now.
Figured I'd just let the gm decide how to do it. The stirge can't move because it's plugged into, so it can't evade the wall, of course it couldn't evade the floor either yet the gm completely ignored the attempt, so who knows.
Personally, as a gm, I would say either the stirge is forced to let go to avoid the wall/floor or it takes some damage (i'd use an initiative check to see if it was fast enough to evade myself). But that is just me.
Think about it, a bug is latched onto your back so you slam your back into the floor. What happens? (there was even a stupid-humor movie that did it too.)
This is one of those world milieu vs mechanics milieu issues really.
Figured I'd just let the gm decide how to do it. The stirge can't move because it's plugged into, so it can't evade the wall, of course it couldn't evade the floor either yet the gm completely ignored the attempt, so who knows.
Personally, as a gm, I would say either the stirge is forced to let go to avoid the wall/floor or it takes some damage (i'd use an initiative check to see if it was fast enough to evade myself). But that is just me.
Think about it, a bug is latched onto your back so you slam your back into the floor. What happens? (there was even a stupid-humor movie that did it too.)
This is one of those world milieu vs mechanics milieu issues really.
I didn't think the Acrobatics check was high enough to warrant damaging the Stirge, they're not exactly common household bugs!
Sorry for the typos remember I juggle 50 of these as a PC and DM so typos are bound to happen. Generally, assume the Descriptives override the OOC notes as they are usually just a copy and paste to save time.
Hm, I see where you are coming from, Zhai, but 'unable to evade' is represented by losing one's dex modifier for grappling.
Plus, the skills, rolls, and mechanical elements are supposed to represent how good/lucky/effective actions of the character are.
Bypassing those to use 'world logic' to overrule game mechanics is a very delicate thing.
As then it's easy to come up with superior choices that will have effects beyond anything that can be covered with mechanics. So why use the mechanics? In fact, why invest in a skill if I can come up with good flavor that lets me cover it?
Plus, of course, that things could backfire - if the Stirge lets go, you may slam yourself into the floor or wall, only for the creature to re-attach itself(after you inflicted some nonlethal to yourself for powerbombing the floor using your spine) - I mean, mechanics-wise it is 'frozen in place' during your action, firmly attached and at your mercy. But in real-world logic, it would likely try to avoid the wall, then reattach(and drain another con) during it's next action
*shrug* Just meant to be helpful by offering a possible mechanical interpretation(heavy shield, shield bash, improvised) that could represent your success.
im sorry, i couldnt log on since wednesday. everytime it just kicked me back to log in screen :(
Yea, I'm back now.
So why use the mechanics?
Well, why do you use mechanics? I don't mean rhetorically either.
For me, the purpose of the mechanics is to have a robust simulationist system to form a solid foundation for providing a broad and consistant baseline, to
A) make gm rulings easier, practical, flexible, and more consistant,
B) the dice rolling part is to add tension and uncertainty without relying purely on arbitrary fiat.
As far as I'm concerned, there is no intention for the rules to be treated, like the rules of a board game, as descriptions of what can or can not be done.
RPGs are not a game to me, not in the same sense that chess, settlers of cataan, or even computer games like Halo and Call of Duty are games. To me an RPG is like a book, except that instead of calling the protagonist an idiot for blindly walking into an obvious trap, we the players get to be the protagonists. When we walk blindly into a trap it is because of our stupidity, or our smarts when we spot the trap, and we are the ones that need to make a plan to handle whatever the situation is. Doesn't even need the players to be heroes or adventurers.
To me, that can't be achieved by treating the game like squad based combat game with story flavored on top.
But it should be noticed that this concept of an RPG doesn't rely on, nor is defined by, the rule set used.
Also, before asking why I don't go play some rules light game instead, simulationist rules help provide a structure to resolve whatever strange plans and ideas players might come up with. Rules light lacks that structure, and is more suitable to players being co-authors rather than protagonists.
A fair point. But at the moment you substitute your intelligence for your characters intelligence, your wisdom for their wisdom, your ideas of what the characters capabilities should be for what their actual abilities are....at that moment the whole concept just turns into freeform storytelling.
Stats become meaningless. Classes become meaningless. Class Features become meaningless. There is no challenge. What happens, happens because it is WILLED to happen. The only defense of the story teller to that is DM Fiat.
While I agree that the players have an obligation to be co-authors of what is happening, and that rules are guidelines, rather than absolute boundaries, I disagree on one important point: Specifically, I think that the values that form up your character SHOULD be representative of what they are capable of doing how well. That is what the rolls are for.
Certainly, I could simply write that I'm leaping over the chasm and using my momentum to tackle the target. I did, with rolls, and am a mobility-focused half-elven acrobatic warrior. So I succeeded, even against the odds. I'm happy and thats great.
I could also have been a stumpy dwarf with the stature of a beer keg, an anvil on his back, and the dexterity of a animated rock, and STILL decided to jump over and tackle her. While success would be amusing, considering the difference between the two concepts, it does not make sense that either could do the exact same thing in the same situation simply because it's a good idea, no matter what their stats and build say.
In my book, you state a course of action you wish to take, then let the dice decide if you manage to pull it off. In other words, they AID your storytelling, by adding a factor of uncertainity.
You take a leap. You hope it works. But if it doesn't, you need to work with the new situation that puts one into. So, to answer your question: I use the mechanics because they are my ally in telling the story. Instead of arbitrarily deciding the outcome of my actions, the mechanics, and dice rolls they bring with them add that element of uncertainity that keeps things fresh. Disregarding the rules to bypass that, to me, eliminates a significant part of the flavor that rules-heavy games carry with them.
I'll respond more detailed later, but I did put,
B) the dice rolling part is to add tension and uncertainty without relying purely on arbitrary fiat.
I disagree about players being coauthors though, or rather, that isn't my desired way to play. I want to be the protagonist, however indirectly. No authoring, nor tactics gaming. I'll eescribe why rules like d20 are better for that than freeform later.
Aye, you put that, but you still asked for my reason, and I felt that point did not cover in a satisfactory way that it's not just about arbitrary fiat.
Because without even going that far, it helps creating forks in the road, not even depending on tension, it adds options by forcing players to consider options.
As for the co-authoring, a matter of definition. Creating a part of the world that extends out from your character helps the GM, by giving him tools to use in storytelling, understanding your character, and having a world more alive, with varied contributions. Both in the form of passive assets, which may be accessed or ignored as seen fit, and active assets that help define who the character is. Placing the burden of that on the Game Master does not, in my eyes, help me be more of a protagonist. Also looking at where you want to go, or things you wish to achieve. I did mention that with Ran having a Gladiator-past and being vainglorious, I toyed with the possibility of him eventually turning into a rockstar-type hero, with fans, groupies, kids dressing up like him, basically taking Leadership for pure flavor. That kind of stuff needs an okay, obviously, but helps shape the world for the protagonists - I have a specific vision of that I would like to eventually see realized, and will do my part in making it come alive. *shrug* But then, as said, that may simply be a matter of definition as I consider the authoring in that case to be abstract - but at the same time it grounds my character more firmly in the world and gives the GM a lever to use/button to press.
Guys. I can't post properly without the app. So for now I have to bow out of a few of my games till I sort this out :( but if allowed I would like to join in as soon as it's sorted?
Might have something to do with my editting issues. I try to edit and I have like 30 seconds to finish or I get a backtracking error.
Hmm, I thought I responded to this Ran, but oh well, I've only got one comment at this point though,
it adds options by forcing players to consider options.
This isn't universal. I think you have, to use a metaphore, the coloring book people, and the blank page people. Put a blank sheet in front of a coloring book person and they'll be at a loss for what to put on the paper, but give them a coloring book and they get quite creative with it. The other group though, give them a blank page and they'll respknd with "just one?" but if you give them a coloring book, they'll get quite frustrated being unable to draw what they want because the lines are j the way.
Then the people in between, are isometric paper peoplr. They like the freedom of a page with no pre chosen subject, but the gridlines make drawing certain things much easier without limiting what can be drawn.
Playing a game like it is chess, or a miniatures combat game, focusing on what the rules say, is like being a coloring book person, while freeform is like the blank page person. I am the isometric paper person. I don't like systems telling me what I can, can't, or must, be, but I do like having a supporting structure that makes whatever I dream easier to handle without telling me how it should be altered.
Guys. I can't post properly without the app. So for now I have to bow out of a few of my games till I sort this out :( but if allowed I would like to join in as soon as it's sorted?
Sure, I'll keep you on the periphery and once you're sorted out, you can jump back in.
I'll be updating once more this week, RL got too hectic there to handle and post at the same time.
Hmm, I thought I responded to this Ran, but oh well, I've only got one comment at this point though,
it adds options by forcing players to consider options.This isn't universal. I think you have, to use a metaphore, the coloring book people, and the blank page people. Put a blank sheet in front of a coloring book person and they'll be at a loss for what to put on the paper, but give them a coloring book and they get quite creative with it. The other group though, give them a blank page and they'll respknd with "just one?" but if you give them a coloring book, they'll get quite frustrated being unable to draw what they want because the lines are j the way.
Then the people in between, are isometric paper peoplr. They like the freedom of a page with no pre chosen subject, but the gridlines make drawing certain things much easier without limiting what can be drawn.
Playing a game like it is chess, or a miniatures combat game, focusing on what the rules say, is like being a coloring book person, while freeform is like the blank page person. I am the isometric paper person. I don't like systems telling me what I can, can't, or must, be, but I do like having a supporting structure that makes whatever I dream easier to handle without telling me how it should be altered.
So basically you're saying that you have a spectrum of "alignments" with people who like to color in the lines/follow the rules ("lawful"), people who hate those limitations ("chaotic"), and people in between ("neutral")? XD
Yep!
;)
I appreciate the description you are offering, it is elaborately put, but I think we have different approaches there. I understand where you are coming from, but let me take this one step further.
While I completely agree with the spectrum you offered, the approach I made was to, and I'll try to stick with the example given, that the coloring book forces people into working with motives they would not have choosen themselves, and thus enforces variety.
The blank canvas offers more powerful options for creativity, but you'll get people only ever painting landscapes of all sorts(think 'cliche' bob ross), and they are never even considering doing another motive.
The isometric paper provides guidelines but offers that same freedom. Yet again, if the painter does not like certain motives('I can't draw people'), s/he is free to avoid that entirely.
And that's basically the core issue I see...it's not so much a way to force people to stick to a pattern, they can paint on their blank canvas all they like, but if they are given a page with pre-drawn lines, they should at least give it a try, even if they would rather paint happy little trees instead of people.
As in, I advocate a mixture of all of these concepts, not sticking to one. There's definitely people happy with only blank pages, and other people who like to stick purely to the coloring book, being careful to not draw over the lines - but the most fun are those who can do both: Deliver a creative performance if given a blank canvas, but willing to follow the coloring book as well, and using the isometric paper as guidance to work with the motive at hand, rather than swap it for a blank page or go for the pre-painted variant.
Know what I mean?
On the contrary, I was referring to the way people think. You can't force a blank page person to think like a coloring book person, certainly not with the design of mechanics.
This is the entirety of the problem. The coloring book people simply don't think like blank page people. So they always see problems with systems not designed from their perspective, things like naturalistic balance, and they just don't see how it could be good game design because it runs contradictory to the how they see the world.
This is why coloring page players have trouble when things like classes, kits, and levels disappear, cause without those "lines" they just can't develop an "image" without significant effort, because the way they think is so ingrained to build up from the lines.
The reverse is also true for the blank page folks.
Another aspect of the same issue may be clearer. It is the difference between details oriented and drama oriented people.
Details oriented people need the details of a story to make sense, because when it doesn't, it shatters the immersion. They can't just ignore the contradictions, because each one that pops up, breaks their immersion and they have to conciously set it aside to dig back into the narrative.
Drama people are reverse. When details are presented that serve only to maintain consistant logic, that sucks the drama out of a scene and the drama people get bored with it. To them, such scenes are functionally distracting from the story.
Forcing them to watch the opposite style just frustrates them. In small amounts, they can just go back to their preference to recharge and fade away that frustration.
Additionally, it isn't the job of the system to force individuals to use options they wouldn't use otherwise, and attempts to do so not only fail, but just add frustration to the game. For example, I don't do much with martial combat. Ever. (the combat system is too abstract and not deep enough to compare satisfactorily with my real world experience.) No amount of martial classes will ever change that either. Instead, the classes limit my ability to have a diverse cast of mages.
If you really want to see players do something outside their norm, the best way to do so is to place semi-mechanical or non-mechanical limits during character generation. To use the metaphore, instead of using a coloring book with pages that include squares, you ask the players to includes squares, and then give them isometric paper with stamps. The coloring book people can then select the square stamp they want to make a coloring book page out of the iso paper, while the blank page people have an infinite number of options for including squares in their page.
Puttinb this into real terms, the gm sets up an all drow game, or an all fighter game, or a campaign with no healing magic, or a game of only humans ("...brother Silas who is most definitely not an elf."), etc. This is a restriction that actually forces players to do something new. A system design can never compete with this trick, espevially not while trying to be broad and flexible.
======
Further is the aspect of fun. Forcing players to step into new options is rarely fun, and generally goes better when they can at least approach that new option in their own way.
Hm.
I accept your opinion, but I'll have to say I disagree.
I believe most people are flexible enough to work in different roles, and not so stagnant in their line of thinking that any deviation throws them completely off-balance.
You seem to consider this a situation where people are forced into doing something that is against their nature. To me, it's more different shades of the exact same thing. So, I don't have the brand of coffee you usually drink, but I have a different coffee right here.
There's certainly people who would not even try that different coffee, but I think most people who have a craving for that liquid would be quite willing to try the other brand. It may not be their new favorite, and they may still like theirs better, but they won't rush to the toilet and throw up.
So, yeah, completely different approach on the matter. "Those guys don't think like these others" is simply something I cannot get behind. I played anything from complete freeform to complete rules-based systems, and enjoyed the whole spectrum. And I don't think I'm an anomaly, and that many people are flexible and can do more than one, without getting overwhelmed/locked up by an abundance/lack of freedom.
So, different viewpoints, and we'll probably simply have to agree that we have differing opinions there.
I think it all depends on how far in the spectrum you go. Using the stirge example, which I think originally started this conversation, if Zhai had just auto-crushed it (or forced it to let go or done damage or something else), that would have been a step towards a blank-page. As someone who probably leans towards the coloring-book side of the spectrum, I probably wouldn't have thought much of it as a one off thing. If Zhai continued to use that tactic throughout the rest of the game, I would be somewhat ok with it because it was consistent with the original ruling, but I would start to wish that that precedent hadn't been set. If Zhai also continued to try using similar logic to accomplish other things to auto-succeed, I would start to get very frustrated.
The "auto-succeed" is, of course, the most blank-paper oriented way to resolve the stirge issue, and there are other, more in-between methods, like requiring an acrobatics check to be successful, and there are different ways to argue about what makes sense ("It's plugged in, so it can't evade", "That's already taken in to account by losing it's Dex to AC", "If you fail, you hurt yourself").
So one decision by itself isn't going to completely change the flavor of a game from coffee to beer (or probably even a different flavor of coffee). But it's also a bit of a balancing act because multiple decisions add up. And while you probably don't want to get too bogged down in a single decision, you can't always give an off-the-cuff answer less it have unintended downstream consequences because you won't know ahead of time if it's going to come up again.
The stirge example is a bad example, because it can so easily be argued in so many ways that it obfuscates the point.
So try a tripwire. Should players be able to just step over it? In the real world, and thus presumably in the world milieu, a 5-year old coukd step over a trip wire if they knew about it.
But that is auto-success isn't it? Yet it makes no sense to tell someone that they can't do something so incredibly simple because "why bother having the trap in the first place?"
A coloring book person finds this a bad thing, because to them, anything of the sort that stereotypically requires a roll, shoukd always require a roll. Why? Because they are not immersed in the world when making tactical choices, rather, they are immersed in the rules.
And that is the difference. Where is the immersion? The rules, or the world milieu?
It is like a weather radar app. Some people can look at the radar and know intellectually that the green, orange, and red areas are places with rain, that the little icons are lightning strikes, but they can't see past the representation, so they have trouble catching on to things that are not perfectly represented. But others can see that lightning strike icon and almost see the flash, and hear the thunder rumbling, to feel the coldness of the lashing rain.
This is important, because it dictates how you handle playing an rpg, how you feel about the mechanics.
Like the radar, the mechanics are not the game, they are not the fictional world itself. The mechanics are just oversimplified (no matter how complex they are) representations of the world milieu. A blank page person looks at mechanics and such as way to get clearer understanding of the world milieu.
While the coloring book people know that there is a fictional world, to them, that world is built from the mechanics rather than merely represented by them, and therefore, they interact with the mechanics like a game of chess.
This is why some people feel cheated by stepping over a trip wire, because regardless of how sensible it is in the world milieu, it bypasses their idea of how things work, because to them, how things work is the mechanics. The blank page people don't see the mechanics as being how things work. The blank page people see the world milieu as working as world beyond the the mechanics, and thus feel cheated when told they can't simply step over the trip wire, because to them, that is going against how the world milieu works.
The part of this is in it's effect on problem-solving and tactics.
Coloring book players see primarily the mechanics, and in looking for a solution, or a tactic, the mechanics is the place they start, and stop, looking, because that is the part that they can work with.
Blank page players, are looking so far beyond the mechanics, that if they knew how to make gunpowder from common materials around the farm, they'd see it as perfectly valid to do so, regardless of mechanics. They don't even bother looking at the mechanics for ideas on what to do to solve a problem or develop a tactic.
Therefore, a blank page person can end up doing macgyver stuff because they see possibility in the world milieu, while the coloring book are so focused on bending the mechanics to their whim, they never see the possibilities that aren't baked into the mechanics.
This isn't to say that coloring book folks are bad, but blank page people and coloring book people are looking in different places for their solutions, and since each of those places function entirely differently, it can feel like cheating or being cheated when dealing with folks of the other type.
This is also what Gygax meant when he said that players could play the rules but miss the game. Because to Gygax, the entire point of the game was to see past the mechanics and play according to the world milieu. Which is why DnD was never big on mechanical balance.