I was GMing my Blades in the Dark game, and my players were setting up for a score, one that was a bit outside of their comfort zone. As they were brainstorming, one of them said something like, “Well, we can’t do that, because they [the opposition] will clearly have done…”. Here’s the thing. I had not said anything like that at all as they were gathering information. The player made their own logical leap and, in doing so, cut off a potentially cool idea for something to do during the score. So I interrupted and told them not to limit their ideas. I asked them what their idea was, listened, and told them there was a way to make that work.

It got me thinking about how players can sometimes limit their own ideas without the GM’s input. That made me think there has to be a better way to do it. So let’s talk about it. 

Limiting Thoughts – What are they?

A limiting thought is when a player comes up with an idea for an action or a plan, and then shoots it down for some arbitrary reason. Both ideas can come from the same person, or they can come from two different people at the table. To be clear, not every idea is a good one. There are plenty of ideas that won’t work within the game you are playing. Limiting thoughts are ideas that could work, but for some reason, the player talks themselves out of it by having another idea that counters the original idea.

A quick example. A player is thinking of ways to sneak into a compound to reach a magical gem that the group intends to steal. They start thinking out loud and come up with an idea to zipline down to the roof of one of the buildings in the compound from a nearby building using their magical rope. Then, in the next breath, they say, “Nope. I am sure they have guards on the rooftops.” Like that, the idea bloomed and was cut down. 

One thought limits the other. 

Why do we limit our thoughts? 

I am not a mind reader, so I don’t know why my players have done it, but I can tell you what has gone through my mind when I have done it, as a player.

Imperfect Shared Narrative Space

Aka – I thought I heard the GM say that. The image of the game world we hold in our mind is a shared narrative space, one that is built mostly with words and occasionally with some images. We all try to maintain the same narrative space in our heads, but it’s never perfect.  

If we misheard or misremembered a description, we could then build a flawed logical argument. In our example, one player may have thought they heard someone ask the GM about guards, and thought they heard they were on the rooftops. 

Being Too Smart 

We sometimes assume something is true because that is how we would have done it. We all know the thing about assuming… 

Why we assume this can be for several reasons:

• We assume the NPC has enough resources and insight to account for every possibility.
• We think the initial idea is too simple and assume that the GM has accounted for this possibility.
• If you were GMing this, you would have made that precaution.
• We could think that the GM is going to try to outplay the table and has come up with a dozen counter plans. 

The reason does not really matter. Once you start assuming you are limiting.

Mimicking Competency 

You could be trying to mimic the competency of your character, and are limiting your thoughts because your professional thief would never do something so simple or lazy. The thing is, you are not a skilled thief; you are playing one, so you really don’t know the answer to that question. It really is just another assumption. 

The GM Secret

For experienced GMs, there are a few things when it comes to limiting thoughts.

One – I may have thought of your idea and may have even come up with a counter, but if you are excited about it, I may make some on-the-fly changes to let you give it a try (often with some kind of skill check). 

Two – I can’t think of everything, it’s nice you think I do. So sometimes, when you assumed I thought of it, I did not. But also, I will fake or hide my reaction so that you think I did, and then go back to One. 

Three – most of my opposition is flawed in some way. I like them to be normal people. So they likely don’t have every possible contingency covered. If a magic rope is a rare item, then it’s unlikely I’ll let the NPC have a counter for that.

So, what is the better way? 

So how do the players and the GM work together to stop using limiting thoughts? 

Player-Side

Ask, don’t assume. If you are worried about there being guards on the roof, ask the GM if there are guards on the roof. If that knowledge is knowable, I am going to either tell you or ask you for a roll. 

Also, tell me your intent. Sometimes players ask these oblique questions, like “Is there a guard on the roof?”, so sometimes I give a basic answer. But if you tell me your intent, I can do a better job giving you my answer. So rather than ask me if a guard is on the roof, tell me something like, “I want to zipline down to the roof using my magic rope. Is there a time when the roof is clear, where I can do that?” 

I now have a lot of options for my answer. You don’t need there not to be guards on the roof the whole time; you need a window of time for your action. More often than not, I am going to say yes, and build some kind of check around your action to make it exciting, since we know the stake for that roll is going to be getting down off the roof before you get spotted by a guard. 

GM-Side

Clear up any mistakes or misunderstandings. While I listen to the players plan or brainstorm, I will interject anytime they are working with bad data. Make sure the shared narrative space is as aligned as possible. 

Ask for intent. Help your players get good at this skill. When they ask one of those oblique questions, don’t answer it; ask for the intention first. Once you understand the intent better, then answer.

Provide as much information as possible. Players will overthink things when they have a lack of information, and overthinking will also lead to limiting thoughts; again, working from limited data. Make sure players have as much information as they can reasonably obtain. You don’t have to just give it away to them; they can work for it, through skill checks, spent resources (spells, money, etc). Be generous with information so that they can work through their ideas and plans. 

Break Through Your Limits

Limiting thoughts is a problem for both sides of the table. For the players, it can prolong coming up with actions and plans. For the GM, it can remove potentially cool ideas from coming to the table. Both sides can work on policing limiting thoughts, and removing them from play. Doing so will make for more engaging and exciting play. 

What about you? Do you, as a player, have issues with limiting thoughts at the table? As a GM, do you run into this when you are running a game? From either side, how are you dealing with them?