Characters acting against the information they have or on information they have no way of having, ideally agaisnt their stated and clearly shown goals.
I can live with having an offscrean phonecall if that's all that's needed, but it'd be nice to at least mention that. But if the party has the only map of the dangerous currents linked to live sensor data to find the path through the dangerous area, please don't Deus Ex Machina the cavalry in at the last moment.
Technology, magic or whatever suddenly working completely different from how it was set up before is just as bad (and even a soft magic system can have boundaries in how far it can be stretched before it becomes absurd).
A bit of a meta-example, but excusing bad storytelling, inconsistencies and plot holes because the story has a strong message to tell.
These things are not mutually excluisive.
While actually caring about the quality of the writing (and acting in case of movies, ...) may not help reinforce a message, I'd argue it at least removes unnecessary distractions from that message and also helps keeping any discussion on the message rather than the technical questions.
I don't think I've ever consciously encountered the scenario described in the OP, or at least not as out of context as described here. Maybe it's just the kind of story I read.
Even then, sometimes things happen without much setup, be it because discovering that is part of the story or because the setup is not that relevant.
What I can agree is that sometimes, authors do a really bad job communicating that time passes between scenes, which may well play into that.
I can live with having an offscrean phonecall if that's all that's needed, but it'd be nice to at least mention that. But if the party has the only map of the dangerous currents linked to live sensor data to find the path through the dangerous area, please don't Deus Ex Machina the cavalry in at the last moment.
Technology, magic or whatever suddenly working completely different from how it was set up before is just as bad (and even a soft magic system can have boundaries in how far it can be stretched before it becomes absurd).
A bit of a meta-example, but excusing bad storytelling, inconsistencies and plot holes because the story has a strong message to tell.
These things are not mutually excluisive.
While actually caring about the quality of the writing (and acting in case of movies, ...) may not help reinforce a message, I'd argue it at least removes unnecessary distractions from that message and also helps keeping any discussion on the message rather than the technical questions.
I don't think I've ever consciously encountered the scenario described in the OP, or at least not as out of context as described here. Maybe it's just the kind of story I read.
Even then, sometimes things happen without much setup, be it because discovering that is part of the story or because the setup is not that relevant.
What I can agree is that sometimes, authors do a really bad job communicating that time passes between scenes, which may well play into that.