Quote:
Originally Posted by MoriartyL
I would say to a whining player: "It's crystal clear that the story allows for you to be kicked out. If you don't have an objection to the story, then you can't have a reasonable objection to the gameplay."
|
And the player would quite reasonably say "Why does the story make the doorman kick me out and not my friend?" The player cries that the situation is unfair because it demonstrably IS unfair. Two people of equal ability will be treated differently because of an arbirtrary game mechanic. This is different from putting in a hard puzzle where the difference between success and failure depends on the ability of the player.
I also can't see how story could justify the difference. What possible reason could a doorman have for treating the same person (the lucky and unlucky player would still be the same PC) differently? I can see no logical explanation for this arbitrary behaviour (who would employ someone that unstable as a doorman?) so suspension of disbelief and trust in the story is lost. Yes, you could argue that each player approaching the doorman is an entirely separate situation (i.e. the actual character only ever approaches the doorman once) but unlucky players will still feel aggrieved because they are thwarted and their comrades are not. This is why I'd prefer you to come up with your own example. I made mine to illustrate a point but I'd prefer to examine one where random options don't give rise to separate results that I feel are logically incoherent.