View Profile: Reynard - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Mark CMG's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:07 PM
    Wisconsin lost a legend today . . . https://www.packers.com/news/packers-legend-bart-starr-dies-at-85
    145 replies | 8404 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mark CMG's Avatar
    Wednesday, 22nd May, 2019, 04:42 AM
    Steven Creech has passed. https://www.hshfuneralhome.com/notices/Steven-Creech https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/help-steve-creech-author-and-game-designer#/
    145 replies | 8404 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Reynard

Basic Information

About Reynard
Introduction:
Writer and gamer.
Location:
Southwestern Connecticut
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
Social Networking

If you can be contacted on social networks, feel free to mention it here.

Twitter:
IanAsItWere
Facebook:
IanAsItWere

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,290
Posts Per Day
0.68
Last Post
Matt Mercer Just Changed My Mind About Multiclassing Friday, 19th April, 2019 01:55 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
61
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:13 PM
Join Date
Friday, 18th January, 2002
Home Page
http://www.ianeller.com
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. LostSoul LostSoul is offline

    Member

    LostSoul
  2. Mark Mark is offline

    CreativeMountainGames.com

    Mark
  3. Mark CMG Mark CMG is offline

    Member

    Mark CMG
  4. The Shaman The Shaman is offline

    Member

    The Shaman
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
No results to show...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sunday, 14th April, 2019

  • 03:57 AM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    ...t, in a game, what is taking place is not the search of a bedroom with bureaus but (say) the search of a workouse that was the site of arson; or the search of a town to see where some stolen horses are stabled; or the search of a library containing hundreds of feet of shelving holding many hundreds of volumes. None of these would be out of place in a D&D game. How is the bedroom search example to be extrapolated to those cases? What details is the GM obliged to narrate in framing the situation? What details is a player obliged to narrate in declaring an action? In the rulebook example, the GM doesn't seem to have described what clothes are in the bureau; does the GM have to describe what books are on the library shelves? Where the shelves are in the building? Whether the building has north or south facing windows? If so, which volumes are faded by the sun to what degree? I think framing this discussion as one of following vs disregarding the rules as opposed to, say, Hussar's and Reynard's dfferences of preference and playstyle, is actively unhelpful.

Saturday, 13th April, 2019

  • 06:37 PM - Immortal Sun mentioned Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    Except that it's not the method we're talking about. You are mistaking one thing for another. Somehow that point just doesn't seem to get through. I'm not sure which method YOU are talking about honestly. I was, in those posts, talking about the methods Reynard was talking about.
  • 04:38 PM - Immortal Sun mentioned Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    Okay, just so we're clear: You're not implying that asking for a reasonably specific goal and approach from players means you will behave as the DM in your anecdote did, right? I can't answer that. Your definition of "reasonably specific" may differ from mine. As Reynard says I'm not terribly concerned with how a player expresses their goals. "I search the room." is perfectly acceptable. I have already determined the DCs for finding the secret desk drawer, the hidden closet compartment, and the knife in the mattress. If the player specifies one of these items as part of their search and makes the DC, I give them the information. If they don't, then I just take a quick look at the scene to make sure nothing is preventing them from searching one or more of these elements, tell them to roll the dice and then if they pass, reward them with one of these clues. If they choose to specify that they are searching an item that holds no useful information, I'll just tell them that. I'm not interested in needlessly befuddling players with things that won't get them anywhere. I'm not going to use obfuscating language like "The chest appears to have nothing." or "You don't see anything right away." unless their check was too low on an element that does co...

Tuesday, 26th March, 2019

  • 05:38 PM - lkj mentioned Reynard in post Arcana of The Ancients: 5E Sci-Fantasy From Monte Cook Games Launches On KS
    So how do the stretch goals work for this campaign, anyway? I'm used to stretch goals being included in addition to whatever is specified as the base reward level for a given tier. But this is the first time I've seen things like "All PDFs unlocked in this campaign" as a tier of its own. So do you only get those PDFs if you pledge at the proper tier, or do you get them with every tier? If you do get them at every tier, what's the purpose of the "All PDFs" tier? On the other hand, if you only get them when you pledge at a level that mentions unlocked PDFs, do they really count as stretch goals? I'm confused. You get precisely what they say you get in the given pledge tier. It's just that as the stretch goals are hit the value you get at a given tier increases. And that's it. So, as Reynard points out, currently, the $160 level is not really a good value. They seem confident that it will be by the end, based on their previous experience. I agree with Reynard though that I was disappointed that their next stretch goal after a monster book was a premium version of the main book. I mean, it's neat, and it's a nice bonus. But personally, I'd much rather have my 'third' book be new content, which means that it's basically not a value added for me. Here's hoping the campaign kicks into high gear after the next goal is hit, and they knock out a few more books. The company seems confident it will, and they have a lot of experience at this sort of thing. So, fingers crossed. AD

Monday, 18th March, 2019

  • 11:17 AM - Sadras mentioned Reynard in post Awards other than XP
    Coin (common or rare) and Gems Treasure (Art Works, Jewellery, Furniture/Fittings, Prize Horse...etc) Monstrous Pet (Griffon, Pegasus...etc) Land and Titles Advance in a hierarchical Organisation, Society, Guild or Faction (renown) - perhaps requiring reallocation of post (i.e. Archbishop) Acquisition of Vessels, Keeps, Caravans or Tavern/Inn, Smithy, Library ...etc Reputation and Prestige Languages and Tool Proficiencies Faith (per DMG) Contacts, Allies, Connections - i.e. Religious, Scholarly/Academic (Sages), Underworld, Royalty, Craftsmen, Navigators, Monsters (Dragons, Outer Realm Beings) Romance (Courtship, Beating of Suitor/s, Engagement, Marriage, Children) Spells Lore i.e. Research Material, Rare/Archaic Maps, Planar, Teleportation Circles Magical Item improvements i.e. A Ring of Jumping that may provide limited flight, weapon imbued with an additional minor property Acquisition of rare materials for spells or magical items Plot Points (per DMG) EDIT: @Reynard despite the above, my advice for your game is not a glacial advancement of 1 RL year = 1 Level up, unless of course if your players really buy into that style of game. Rather... Cap Hit Points based on size; Change up the Rest mechanic and tie it into the Exhaustion mechanic (I'm using this); Buff up monsters (that goes without saying); Require something extraordinary in the fiction to advance characters from level x to y. (For instance, in my campaign they destroyed a Beholder that had been feeding on the essence of a dead deity, once they destroyed the beholder that essence was released and the PCs were awash with it, allowing them to access level 10 and higher); Change up the setting from village to town to epic to cosmic. Do not be afraid to have the PCs be feared;

Sunday, 17th March, 2019

  • 12:30 AM - CubicsRube mentioned Reynard in post Removing Hit Points from the Game
    Reynard although hitpoint inflation doesn't bother me as ive never played past 11th level in 5e, i have run some numbers on where my sweet spot would be. Ultimately I decided on this: at level 0 use you CON score for hitpoints. At level 1 and every level thereafter, use the average hit points gained per level WITHOUT the CON modifier. This front loads some of the HP and most classes with a COn bonus will break even around 3rd to 5th level. It props up those with a low con slightly and brings down those with a high con score slightly, lessening the hp gap between classes. Note i would still use the con mod for hit dice recovery and for con saves of course, so it is still a useful stat. That may or may not work for you.

Saturday, 29th September, 2018

  • 03:51 PM - OB1 mentioned Reynard in post Tell Me About Your Experiences With High Level 5E
    Reynard - Thanks for the write up. Just curious as to what the level of the characters were and what you calculated the XP value of each fight as. Also, what if any magic items did the party have? I show the first fight as 29,700 XP and the second as a 33,100 XP base. If these were tier IV characters I probably wouldn't use a multiplier since all of the enemies are of a CR significantly below the party.

Thursday, 27th September, 2018

  • 01:56 AM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Reynard in post Sell me on D&D Beyond
    While there are various pros and cons, options to weigh, YMMV, etc., the decision to purchase content on D&D Beyond basically boils down to: Buy it because you would feel guilty about torrenting a PDF of the core rule books. OR, don't buy it because you don't feel guilty about torrenting a PDF of the core rule books. This would only seem true with a shallow understanding of what DDB provides. Having the PHB on DDB is strictly more valuable than having a PDF of the PHB. By far. Like, I can't even fathom how one could equate them. Reynard DDB is better than other digital versions of the books because of a few factors. 1, Indexed searching with in depth filters 2, hyperlinks 3, multiple ways to find information. You can either open the PHB via the Compendium tab, or go to Characters>Classes>Official>Wizard, and look there, or just type in Spellbook, and scroll down. 4, easy access to what is being playtested in unearthed arcana 5, great way to tinker with homebrew, and maintain a searchable collection of it, and then use it in conjuction with official material. 6, mobile app. it's still in beta, but it already has offline viewing of the books, and will eventually have the full functionality of the service. So, even if DDB goes away, you still have whatever books you downloaded to your devices from the app. Also, if you get the Legendary Bundle, it's all 15% down from normal amazon prices, including anything you ever buy on the service going forward. Also, if you just by the core books right now, and decided to...

Wednesday, 12th September, 2018

  • 07:45 PM - Satyrn mentioned Reynard in post Black Pudding split
    I think here original refers to the pudding being targeted but not their starting HP. Otherwise, you could theoretically be in an endless pudding feedback loop! So...it's the second option: That's totally how I read it, too . . . But I'm with Reynard. When I gave my homebrew demon the ability the split in half, I had it so that a Large one split into 2 Mediums, with the chance that those Mediums inherit the ability to split into Smalls. Even if the Large had 1 hit point when it split, each of those Smalls would start with their normal max (somewhere around 10 each). Mostly because it's meaner.

Thursday, 23rd August, 2018


Tuesday, 21st August, 2018

  • 12:41 PM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    ...tomatically as part of movement by default" and "jump farther more recklessly knowing i can risk a lot of potential bad results aka setbacks" [Athletcis check, possible setbacks and other bad results.}I can see that. For my tastes, that's drilling down more than is needed - like we don't normally distinguish between different sorts of moves in melee combat - but that's just taste. Either way, the resolution comes out the same. My approach puts the p 64 rules more on the GM side, whereas your approach treats them as something (or as a model of something, like knowledge of their capacity for performing) that the characters engage with in their atheltic pursuits. The potentially different goals can be "jump a specific distance to a specific spot" (targeted jump at/to something) or just jump as far as i can in this direction" or quite a few others. likely others as well.Agreed, but again I think this sort of granularity isn't needed most of the time. I guess it becomes relevant for Reynard's scenario, though, where the PC has to not only jump from A but land on a reasonably small and wobbly B. One approach would be to up the DC for the STR (Athletics) check, and if it fails by no more than 5 allow a DEX (Acrobatics) check to hold on anyway.
  • 04:57 AM - iserith mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    ...was over 22 feet, I don't think that the outcome of an attempt by a muscled and athletically trained human in the D&D world to jump an 18' chasm is certain failure. Obviously, given the rule on p 64 and assuming less than 18 STR, it is not certainly successful either. Hence it would be determined by a STR (Athletics) check made against an appropriate difficulty. My reason for spelling this out is simply to demonstrate the point that what is at issue in this thread, at least as far as the current discussion is concerned, is not the proper way to adjudicate 5e, nor the closely related issue of whose job it is to call for checks, nor the issue of whether or not "I clear the chasm by jumping over it" states an approach to the goal of getting across the chasm - it manifestly does. What is at issue is what the rule on p 64 makes certain and leaves uncertain. On this issue of jumping the chasm, that's the sole point of difference between me and @robus and I think @SkidAce, @5ekyu and @Reynard, on the one hand, and you and @Charlaquin on the other. I still think this comes down to approach. There are two goals here, you might say: Jumping Normally and Jumping An Unusually Long Distance. You can certainly achieve the second goal, in some circumstances, given a viable approach. This might mean interacting with the terrain in some fashion that is unusual, getting the assistance of an ally, or using a resource that reasonably helps. The resolution of that outcome may or may not involve a Strength (Athletics) check. What is a viable approach requires context and, even if we're all looking at the same context, we may rule differently as to its viability. Some might say it works, others that it doesn't - no roll. Some might say it's uncertain and call for a check. Among those latter folk, the DCs may vary. Do I think a character can jump an unusually long distance? Yes. The rules say it's possible. What matters is the approach they offer to achieve that goal.
  • 04:30 AM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    ... was over 22 feet, I don't think that the outcome of an attempt by a muscled and athletically trained human in the D&D world to jump an 18' chasm is certain failure. Obviously, given the rule on p 64 and assuming less than 18 STR, it is not certainly successful either. Hence it would be determined by a STR (Athletics) check made against an appropriate difficulty. My reason for spelling this out is simply to demonstrate the point that what is at issue in this thread, at least as far as the current discussion is concerned, is not the proper way to adjudicate 5e, nor the closely related issue of whose job it is to call for checks, nor the issue of whether or not "I clear the chasm by jumping over it" states an approach to the goal of getting across the chasm - it manifestly does. What is at issue is what the rule on p 64 makes certain and leaves uncertain. On this issue of jumping the chasm, that's the sole point of difference between me and robus and I think SkidAce, 5ekyu and Reynard, on the one hand, and you and Charlaquin on the other.

Monday, 20th August, 2018

  • 03:15 PM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    ...ll allow the character to succeed. I prefer using "say 'yes'" as a device to manage dramatic pacing rather than as a response to tactical planning, and to use "fail forward" to manage the outcomes of failure. It's also the case that it's a long time since I've run a system with a "notoriously fickle" d20 (4e has the illusion of being such a system, but there are so many player-side resources for generating post hoc boosts, retries, etc that it really isn't) - BW and Prince Valiant are dice pools, Classic Traveller is mostly 2d6, and Cortex+ Heroic is very complicated dice pools with a lot of player-side manipulation as well. Because of the way 5e strongly demarcates "mundane" checks and "magical" spells and class abilities, I suspect it may be hard to play in the style I prefer, which is one reason why I don't play it. But on this particular issue of a character jumping further than s/he easily can, I think drifting it in that direction in the way that I've described (following Reynard's description) is not that hard at all. (And in lieu of any sophisticated "fail forward" in the event of failure, if the PC is 14th level as Reynard suggested then the hp mechanics will probably carry that load.)
  • 04:44 AM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    I would certainly allow a PC to exceed their normal jump distance with a successful Strength (Athletics) check. I just don't consider "I try to jump further than I can normally jump by jumping normally" an action with an uncertain outcome, and therefore wouldn't call for a Strength (Athletics) check to resolve it. If, on the other hand, the player offers a method of jumping further than they can normally, that may or may not require a check to resolve, and as per the rules, I would call for Strength (Athletics) to resolve it.Can you give an example of a method of jumping further than they can normally? I mean, are you envisaging the player describing the use of a pogo stick, or spring board? Or a ramp to gain extra height? It's not clear to me why those sorts of things would involve STR checks (using acrobatic equipment looks like DEX check territory to me). A STR check smacks to me of trying harder, which is what Reynard described. If a character tries harder, I also think it's fair game to impose costs eg in this sort of case, hp loss for strained/torn muscles. That works very well in 4e (in my experience), but may be it doesn't translate into 4e where hp are perhaps governed by tighter expectations for their loss and recovery?
  • 04:34 AM - pemerton mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    I'm with Reynard - taking a deep breath and giving it all you've got is an approach to jumping across a chasm. Because it takes time to take a deep breath, the GM might reasonably advance any "clocks" that are ticking in the situation.
  • 02:37 AM - Oofta mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    Unusually being the key there. If you are just going to say yes to every time they ask to jump farther, it's no longer unusual. Also, that rule does not exist in a vacuum. It exists within the context of Page 6. To declare an action you describe what your PC is doing and then the DM adjudicates it. "I use athletics to jump farther" is not a description of what your PC is doing. It's a statement of intent, sure, but a description it is not. So you are breaking the rule on Page 6 if you accept that. That's fine, but it's effectively a house rule to do so. Usually you jump feet equal to your strength. I never said I would allow it all the time and honestly, I don't use the jumping rules all that often in the first place. If I thought someone was abusing it, I'd discuss it with the player. But, if the character is being chased by zombies like in Reynard's scenario I'd allow it. I think it's more fun, realistic and a cleaner reading of the rules. As others have pointed out, you don't have the corner on the truth.

Sunday, 19th August, 2018

  • 08:23 PM - iserith mentioned Reynard in post Missing Rules
    We have probably exhausted the potential for worthwhile debate on the topic, especially given our very different readings of that paragraph in the DMG. But thank you! It was a fun discussion. Indeed. I'll leave you with this which gives an example of what the DMG is talking about in that section (page 239, for anyone who wants to see what Reynard was referencing). So here, from Basic Rules, page 2: Dungeon Master (DM): OK, one at a time. Phillip, youíre looking at the gargoyles? Phillip: Yeah. Is there any hint they might be creatures and not decorations? DM: Make an Intelligence check. <--- Phillip: Does my Investigation skill apply? <--- DM: Sure! Phillip (rolling a d20): Ugh. Seven. DM: They look like decorations to you. And Amy, Riva is checking out the drawbridge? In other words, "Often, players ask whether they can apply a skill proficiency to an ability check."

Sunday, 5th August, 2018

  • 04:37 AM - Henry mentioned Reynard in post The playtest is here!!
    Critical Role was Pathfinder when it was a homegame, for the two years before the stream started. It was never streamed as Pathfinder. They switched to 5e for its faster play. CR has too good of a relationship with WotC to switch back now, and D&D Beyond is a major sponsor. Pathfinder has done a few attempts at streaming. Know Direction has one: http://knowdirectionpodcast.com/category/podcasts/kd-adventurous/ And there is an official Paizo Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/officialpaizo But few games are streamed there. They did apparently do a playtest game: https://twitter.com/JasonBulmahn/status/1025252371205697536 If a podcast of an hour or so is something Reynard is looking for, Glass Cannon Podcast is a very good one to check into, and itís officially Paizo sponsored.

Monday, 8th January, 2018

  • 06:02 PM - Oofta mentioned Reynard in post Setting Party level vs an Ancient Red Dragon
    I've been busy and didn't respond before, but I do have to say that the party was given every possible advantage and then some. So Reynard, I wanted to give some feedback ... I don't think the system is necessarily broken, but you bent too far backwards to "help" the party. It happens to all DMs, I know it's happened to me more than once (and probably will again) and it has very little to do with 5E. Solos are never easy to run, have never worked very well and the CR guidelines aren't going to be much help when you gave them this much of an advantage and an additional 20th level character. Having said all that, I'm trying to give some helpful advice. But the big question is: did the players have fun? If they did, then the encounter was a success. Sometimes the players stomp on your encounters, it's part of the game. wish to create a simulacrum of a 20th level bard Did they have access to a 20th level bard for the 12 hours it takes to cast the spell? Also, note the part of the rules of Simulacrum where it gives the rules for repairing it. Specific beats general in this game and if there's a specific rule...


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 49 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 16th April, 2019


Saturday, 13th April, 2019

  • 09:04 PM - iserith quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    First of all, context matters. Ostensibly there are things happening around the example I presented and that bolded part could literally follow a player saying , "I try and slip into the room and close the door quietly behind me." I do not understand why people insist on assuming the worst possible interpretation of the idea. It's maddening. The DM is still describing what the character does in your example, which is the player's role and responsibility, not the DM's. Aside from that, I don't see the GM and player roles as lists of responsibilities. Everyone at the table is working toward everyone having fun. If spending 25 minutes of your 2 hour session on the search of the study is fun for your group, have at it. But in my experience time is at a premium and moving the game forward is preferable to detailed simulations of the search procedure. I will put my game's pace and the amount of content we cover every session up against any other game any day of the week. We are fast by an...
  • 08:57 PM - Satyrn quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    First of all, context matters. Ostensibly there are things happening around the example I presented and that bolded part could literally follow a player saying , "I try and slip into the room and close the door quietly behind me." I do not understand why people insist on assuming the worst possible interpretation of the idea. It's maddening. Aside from that, I don't see the GM and player roles as lists of responsibilities. Everyone at the table is working toward everyone having fun. If spending 25 minutes of your 2 hour session on the search of the study is fun for your group, have at it. But in my experience time is at a premium and moving the game forward is preferable to detailed simulations of the search procedure. :hmm: While those aren't very flattering interpretations, at least they aren't the worst possible. :p
  • 08:43 PM - iserith quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    GM: You slip into the study and close the door quietly behind you. Based on your observations of the house guards, you have about three minutes before they come to inspect the room. Player: Okay, I go to the desk and and check all the drawers for false bottoms and then look behind all the wall pictures for hidden safes. GM: Hold on. The desk is a big heavy oak thing but it doesn't have any drawers. [cue extended back and forth with the GM trying to get the player's vision of the study to align perfectly with their vision of it] Compare that to the situation in which the player simply says, "I search the study for clues." The GM can then ask for a a Perception roll (or not, depending on the specifics) and narrate the results of that roll, including whatever descriptive elements are important. Now the GM and the player still have their own mental images of the study and they are still different from one another's but those differences don't matter and don't impede play. To me, thi...
  • 08:20 PM - DM Dave1 quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    None of that contradicts my point: players do not necessarily benefit from being overly granular in declaring actions at my table. "I search the study" is as good as and possibly superior to a series of more specific declarations. Similarly, on topic, "I try to determine if he's lying" is good enough. Canít argue with that - if it works at your table, go with it. At our table, that would get old fast for the players. They like to describe what their characters are doing and why. For them, that isnít just possibly superior, it just is. And it doesnít end up being a series of declarations either - in fact it gives multiple PCs a chance to contribute to the search in their own way and allow for it to take less in-game time. For us, that keeps each scene from being a simple rehash of the last time they searched a room or tried to see if an NPC was lying. Itís not overly granular, itís just how we role/roll at our table.
  • 08:00 PM - Satyrn quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    None of that contradicts my point: players do not necessarily benefit from being overly granular in declaring actions at my table. "I search the study" is as good as and possibly superior to a series of more specific declarations. Similarly, on topic, "I try to determine if he's lying" is good enough. You and Oofta are far better at gleaning your e players' intentions than I am. I see ""I try to determine if he's lying" and I know you, the Enworld poster, are suggesting the method described in PH in the Insight description because this thread is all about that. But at the table, if Insight hasn't even been mentioned during the session, I wouldn't know that you're trying to read his body language or do something else. I might guess you're trying to determine he lying by questioning his aide sitting beside him, or checking the reference library if recorded facts could show the NPC was lying. I'm not likely gonna know what you mean if you don't tell me what you mean.
  • 06:48 PM - DM Dave1 quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    GM: You slip into the study and close the door quietly behind you. Based on your observations of the house guards, you have about three minutes before they come to inspect the room. Player: Okay, I go to the desk and and check all the drawers for false bottoms and then look behind all the wall pictures for hidden safes. GM: Hold on. The desk is a big heavy oak thing but it doesn't have any drawers. [cue extended back and forth with the GM trying to get the player's vision of the study to align perfectly with their vision of it]. Thatís on the DM, regardless of play style. If it mattered that the desk had no drawers, then the DM should describe it as such when setting up the scene. If a player wants to search the drawers of a desk but I as DM pictured in my mind a desk with no drawers for no particular reason, well, the desk now has drawers because it doesnít matter and thereís no reason to halt a scene for it. Similarly if I describe a big room and it is the scene of a battl...
  • 05:56 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    GM: You slip into the study and close the door quietly behind you. Based on your observations of the house guards, you have about three minutes before they come to inspect the room. Player: Okay, I go to the desk and and check all the drawers for false bottoms and then look behind all the wall pictures for hidden safes. GM: Hold on. The desk is a big heavy oak thing but it doesn't have any drawers. [cue extended back and forth with the GM trying to get the player's vision of the study to align perfectly with their vision of it] Compare that to the situation in which the player simply says, "I search the study for clues." The GM can then ask for a a Perception roll (or not, depending on the specifics) and narrate the results of that roll, including whatever descriptive elements are important. Now the GM and the player still have their own mental images of the study and they are still different from one another's but those differences don't matter and don't impede play. And this is where ou...
  • 04:28 PM - iserith quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    I disagree. I am not the least bit interested in playing "mother may I" with my players. Players don't ask for permission to do things in my game. They just do them. In fact, my table rules are very clear on this: "Describe what you want to do by stating a clear goal and approach. A question is not a statement of goal and approach, nor is asking to make an ability check or the like." if i feel like more information is needed, i will ask for it. I don't have to do this if they are stating a clear goal and approach every time. If the player offers more precise description, I'll accept it but often ask the player to pull back on their own assumptions when doing so. What do you mean here? I am interested in what the player wants their character to accomplish and getting there -- at least to the attempt -- as efficiently as possible. Pixelbitching, whether in the physical environment or in NPC interactions, is a waste of everyone's time and offers no benefits as far as I am con...
  • 04:09 PM - iserith quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    Right. And we expect the player to decide *what* actions they will take when conducting the social part of the game, but it's silly to ask them to actually perform those actions (speaking in character, interpreting cues). Just as silly as asking them to explain how they are going to disarm the trap or asking them to go outside and climb a tree. that is what the values on the character sheet are for. Why should there be any difference between the following scenarios. To properly adjudicate, all we need is for the player to describe what they want to do which includes a goal (what they hope to achieve) and an approach (how they go about it) with reasonable specificity. We need this information to decide whether the proposed action is a success, a failure, or whether there's uncertainty as to the outcome. If there is uncertainty as to the outcome and there's a meaningful consequence of failure, then some kind of roll is appropriate. The goal tells us what the player's expectations are. The appro...
  • 03:47 PM - Immortal Sun quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    I have a new, better answer to the question in the title of this thread: Depending on what actions take, any skill might be called upon by the DM to resolve uncertainty. They might use stealth to spy on the subject, or call upon their knowledge of religion to find falsehoods in their cover story, or persuade the subject to fess up. And, yes, they might describe an approach that results in an Insight roll. So, yes. Very much agree that "Insight" is not the only skill that might be used to determine the NPC is lying. Here's the problem with this, and it goes for most of the interpersonal skills in the game: it asks more from the player than other skill uses do, and therefore limits a player's choices of playable character types. In the simplest and most obvious example, a player's physical fitness has no bearing at all on that player's character's physical fitness, so any player can choose an action adventure hero to play. But when a GM requires a player to say exactly what their character ...
  • 03:36 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    Here's the problem with this, and it goes for most of the interpersonal skills in the game: it asks more from the player than other skill uses do, and therefore limits a player's choices of playable character types. In the simplest and most obvious example, a player's physical fitness has no bearing at all on that player's character's physical fitness, so any player can choose an action adventure hero to play. But when a GM requires a player to say exactly what their character would say to convince the king to do the thing, the player with social anxiety or another limitation can't contribute as meaningfully. In the Insight example, providing a clue ("The baron seems to be sweating excessively.") potentially asks the player to be smarter, more observant or more experienced in social interactions than they are in real life. What's more, it also puts a lot of weight on the GM's shoulder's to provide very precise sensory information to the players and attempt to avoid miscommunications that wi...

Friday, 12th April, 2019

  • 06:12 PM - Warmaster Horus quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    So from the player's perspective there is no effect of a successful skill check. No, they know what they rolled and hear me state a result. If their roll was good they can weight on the side that they succeeded and what I said is correct. But it might not. Knowing the state of another's thoughts can be a skill but seems a bit overpowering to make it an absolute science. YMMV

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 05:41 PM - lkj quoted Reynard in post Arcana of The Ancients: 5E Sci-Fantasy From Monte Cook Games Launches On KS
    I am trying very hard to be fiscally responsible and not jump back in on the Every PDF level.... But going with the 'Every PDF' level is fiscally responsible. It would only be irresponsible to go in at the 'all in' $160 level. Even though that level is turning into a great deal. I am not biased by wanting more people to sign up to hit more stretch goals in any way. Nope. Not me. AD
  • 05:40 PM - Oofta quoted Reynard in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    This seems like a piece of free information or at best the result of a successful perception check. Insight would provide some information about that behavior. Skill checks exist to facilitate play byt assuming the character is aware of a lot more than the player. An Insight check is a rough model of the PC's intuition and/or experience with all the cues the NPC is giving off. "He looks nervous" is among those clues, not the answers. "Based on how nervous he looks, you are fairly certain he is lying or at least hiding the truth," is a better result from a successful insight check. Whereas I would say that it depends on the NPC. In my case, I'm assuming that Franky is a habitual liar and tries to hide what he's really thinking, even when he's telling the truth. Now maybe noticing him glancing at the captain is a lower DC, possibly even low enough that it's automatically noticed. Or may it's a micro-expression, something he does so quickly that you really have to be paying attention to...
  • 04:42 PM - Istbor quoted Reynard in post Arcana of The Ancients: 5E Sci-Fantasy From Monte Cook Games Launches On KS
    I dropped out in the wake of the Fantasy Grounds Unity KS announcement. While I am interested in AotA, I am absolutely certain to actually use FGU. Limited funds and all. I'll definitely take a look at the main book when it comes out though. That makes sense to me. The AotA really exploded as it nears the end. So I imagine there will be plenty of product for you to check out when that time comes.

Monday, 8th April, 2019

  • 04:33 PM - CleverNickName quoted Reynard in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    I wonder at what point during the initial surge they realized they may have created a monster and possibly bit off more than they could chew? I mean, I am sure they are excited but I imagine they must have had a moment where they realized the fan base really wanted this, and a lot of it, and that must have been intimidating even if just for a second.Did you see the talk they gave, just a few hours after the Kickstarter had been announced and they had already hit the $3M mark? I think that was the moment. :-) The looks on their faces...

Tuesday, 26th March, 2019

  • 11:14 PM - gyor quoted Reynard in post Arcana of The Ancients: 5E Sci-Fantasy From Monte Cook Games Launches On KS
    The stretch goals only indicate what MCG is going to produce for the line (initially by way of the kickstarter anyway). You don't get them for free, though. You still have to pledge to the proper level to get whatever it is you want. As it is I may back down to just the main book and order the monster book as an add on. I was a little disappointed that the $185K stretch goal was a a premium version of the book rather than additional sourcebooks. Unless there is a big surge at the end I don't see the number of books swelling to make "All In" worth it. Yeah, given all pdf is its own tier, making the premium book the next goal was a huge mistake, especially this far into the campaign, with only one other pdf, that you can get cheaper as a pdf. If they made it clear that there would be a minimum of 3 or 4 pdf for that tier it would reassure those backers. If they don't offer more pdf to that tier a lot will just do what you did.
  • 09:26 PM - Charlaquin quoted Reynard in post Meta D&D Campaign
    Isn't that every campaign? Itís how most of mine end up.
  • 08:56 PM - Ralif Redhammer quoted Reynard in post Meta D&D Campaign
    For that sort of trope-skewering and lean-in, I'd recommend Diana Wynne Jones' "The Tough Guide to Fantasyland." It's sarcastic and insightful, while still evidencing a love of fantasy. Do you have recommended reading or viewing? Thanks!


Page 1 of 49 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Reynard's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites