I merely would like to hear other's opinions of this because it has come up two days in a row for me in two different games.
Often, for sake of expedience, there are certain assumptions made in character. Typically these are things like going to the bathroom, eating, drinking, sleeping, preparing spells at a set time, sharpening your weapon, etc..
Sometimes the assumptions can go larger than that. A request for a character to draw a map of where they explore by an NPC, can it be assumed it is done without mentioning it, because it is a re-quest and has a reward? What about sharing of knowledge or information? If the party sage makes a 30 knowledge check on a DC 12 creature, is it safe to assume they automatically tell everything they know to the rest of the party?
If not to any of these, do you play them out or require they be played out in character? Do you as a GM or player make it a point to mention eating rations or buying a meal? Do you ask if they are mapping or state you are doing so at the times you do it? Do you require they say what they know, or do you share the info as your character would?
What is the cutoff for what is assumed and what should be declared?
I hope it does not show what side of this discussion I am on, as I'm trying to present an unbiased question.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We vary this based on different games and the feel we're going for. Some games we track encumbrance to the 0.1 pound, roleplay out purchase of all supplies, track ammunition, convey information via notes between player and DM and generally assume that if it wasnt explicitly said, it didnt happen. Other games we've played, these sorts of things are all in the background (for some campaings we even skip over identifying items for instance - so we'll just flat out state what magical item has been found, what its properties/charges are and so forth - learning that is all assumed to occur "off camera"). In these latter campaigns, a knowledge check by one player is just going to be assumed to be shared unless the roller specifically says otherwise.
I think the line is based around where you want the focus of the game to be - if you insist on everything being spelled out then there's going to be a lot of "we stop and check for traps", lots of pauses in the climactic action to tidy up details - lots of time spent describing the order of the watch, camping precautions, and things like that. I personally quite enjoy that level of minutiae but many of our players dont and I think it does detract somewhat from an epic "save the world" storyline.
A bit of a ramble, but my answer is basically that it depends on the storyline and the scope of the campaign/adventure rather than on the specific action involved. Obviously, it requires everyone to be on the same page.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, I'll vary depending on the pace of the game at that moment in time, and availability of resources.
If we're playing out days at a time for mass combat or kingdom management I'm not going to go to the level of asking PCs to account for their individual actions during that time.
Shipwrecked on a desert island? I'm going to start doing resource tracking and asking to know when people are consuming those resources.
It's one of those things that will vary from table to table, campaign to campaign, session to session, depending on the GM/group's preferences and what is needed at the time. As far as "sides of the discussion" go, I don't feel there are any definitive sides that can argue one way or another, due to that variance. It's just something everyone has to feel out the best solution for.
You can't define solid cutoffs, other than "when it feels wrong."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just remember what they say about assuming: It makes an ume out of you and the donkey.
...do you play them out or require they be played out in character? Do you as a GM or player make it a point to mention eating rations or buying a meal? Do you ask if they are mapping or state you are doing so at the times you do it? Do you require they say what they know, or do you share the info as your character would?
What is the cutoff for what is assumed and what should be declared?
I usually establish a convention of things the party does "by default", specifically because I don't need/want the players to call for everything they do. This is pretty elastic and can change from a game to another, or even within a game. It typically includes a default marching order, spell preparation, watch turns, sharing general info etc.
If the players want to do different, then they need to call it out specifically.
Isn't there a saying about that? "When is it safe to assume?", "Is it ever safe to assume?", "Its never safe to assume", or something like that. Never been good with English phrases.
If not to any of these, do you play them out or require they be played out in character? Do you as a GM or player make it a point to mention eating rations or buying a meal? Do you ask if they are mapping or state you are doing so at the times you do it? Do you require they say what they know, or do you share the info as your character would?
What is the cutoff for what is assumed and what should be declared?
This will vary for every individual group - you're not going to get a consensus on any of this. (Nor should you.)
My group, for example, is very detail oriented, so we say almost everything except for vital bodily functions and other functions that would make your character 'work normally'. So:
Often, for sake of expedience, there are certain assumptions made in character. Typically these are things like going to the bathroom, eating, drinking, sleeping, preparing spells at a set time, sharpening your weapon, etc..
... we make no statements on any of this. For us: assumed. (With some caveats - WHEN they sleep needs to be stated. HOW MUCH food/water they have needs to be stated/tracked.
But these:
Sometimes the assumptions can go larger than that. A request for a character to draw a map of where they explore by an NPC, can it be assumed it is done without mentioning it, because it is a re-quest and has a reward? What about sharing of knowledge or information? If the party sage makes a 30 knowledge check on a DC 12 creature, is it safe to assume they automatically tell everything they know to the rest of the party?
... would have to be stated. Every time. (But it's not hard for us, since we're a long time group and we have gotten into a smooth-running groove over the years.)
If not to any of these, do you play them out or require they be played out in character? Do you as a GM or player make it a point to mention eating rations or buying a meal? Do you ask if they are mapping or state you are doing so at the times you do it? Do you require they say what they know, or do you share the info as your character would?
Yes, to all of these. But, again, see 'groove' above. "We mark off rations/supplies" (every player does so at once) or the cleric "I cast create food/water" <marks it off>. When somebody "maps" they literally map on a sheet of paper (and even mark 'map of X' on their character sheet equipment) - and then [if they wish] share that map paper with the group when they make their decisions.
This probably won't work for more free-running loosey-goosey groups, but like I said - we're detail oriented.
EDIT: Oh... yeah. The first two posts.
The first two posts covered our gaming really well.
|
We usually hadnwave sanitary actions, eating, sleeping etc.
Unless it's plot important, in which case, well, let's just say that there is one terrified halfling who will never ever again go into the forest to do number two without at least a sword and some alchemist's fire.
As for encumbrance, we generally avoid tracking it unless a character is blatantly wearing too much stuff, and then we sit down, calculate the weight and start laughing.
So... you assumed.
*rimshot!*
I assume almost nothing, especially things that have advantages and disadvantages, like using Survival or Stealth. If you do, players will have a tendency to move at their full speed until they find themselves in a situation where they should have used Stealth, and then say something like:
"Well I figured it was assumed I would be sneaking down the dungeon corridor."
As a basic rule of thumb, anything that would be described in prose (creeping down a tunnel, hunting) should not be automatic, while things that are automatic and not described 90% of the time in prose (breathing, taking drinks of water on a long journey) can be.
Thank you all for your replies, I just wanted to get an idea of how others viewed it.
Personally, I grew up with the saying "When you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME." So, I personally try to avoid it.
When I play, I consider the game to be one about taking actions, and you can't assume an action that has in game consequences is taken unless declared. Like one poster said above, if there are rules for it, then it must be accounted for. If it is assumed you ate, then you better mark off a ration.
If you didn't say you used Survival to find food, then you didn't do so.
If you didn't say you were moving stealthily, you didn't do so.
If you didn't say you prepared different spells than the ones the day before, you must have kept the same ones.
If you didn't say you slept, you are fatigued or exhausted (these I'm not certain of, I can't seem to find sleep rules for anyone other than prepared casters).
If you didn't set up a watch rotation while you slept, then you all get the -10 to your perception checks for being asleep.
If you didn't say you when and where you mapped, you don't have a map.
And if you didn't say you told the party what you learned, they don't know.
From the other perspective, there are no rules for bathroom functions, so no declared action required. No rules for breathing, unless there ISN'T air to breathe, no declared action required. No rules for sharpening your weapon (There are whetstones in the CRB, but they do nothing, and there are no rules for a blade dulling), so no declared action required
I'm fine, as both a player and GM, with establishing patterns "Anytime I make a knowledge check I tell the group." "Every night we pull watch in this order." "I map each room after we have made sure it's safe.", because they are no longer assumptions. The actions have been declared at least once, with an always caveat, and are not suddenly appearing as an afterthought.
My players go for light or no-armor characters almost exclusively, so I've never had the armor donning issue come up. Strangely enough, I don't think it has anything to do with that rule. They tend to play hybrid classes that only get light armor, or DEX based martials.
|
"You didn't mention taking off armor, so you're fatigued from sleeping in armor." Next night, "You said you changed into a chain shirt to sleep, but you never said you put your plate back on. That's an AC 14, right? He hits." And yeah, that's only a slight exaggeration.
The same argument for naturally assuming that a character puts their armor back on in the morning could be just as easily be said for the thief character sneaking alone down the corridor... After all, sneaking IS something a thief tends to do... However, some GMs don't like to make such assumptions, and what is "a no-brainer" to one player (like putting on their armor in the morning without actually stating said action), is not so for another player...
If you didn't say you slept, you are fatigued or exhausted (these I'm not certain of, I can't seem to find sleep rules for anyone other than prepared casters).
The others, maybe. This one - the players can forget about things the PCs would notice. Mostly you feel when you're tired and when you need to stop and rest. I'd at least tell them "You're getting tired. Are you pushing on or resting?"
|
|
When can we assume in game?
.
.
.
I think it depends on the group and the level of the characters.
Low Level characters should be played with fewer assumptions but at higher levels we can assume they do or don't do certain things.
Also, many groups' style allows for character knowledge that exceeds Player knowledge so my Cleric PC, for example, would know the appropriate protocols of behavior and etiquette at the Temple even if I don't. Maybe at 1st or 2nd level the DM should require a small Knowledge: Religion check but certainly not after a few levels.