Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Character play vs Player play
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6421569" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I think there are (at least) two things going on here.</p><p></p><p>First, whether the door is open or shut is an element in the resolution of a declared action - where the action is "I flee!"</p><p></p><p>I think this is different from the beard case, where there is no declared action - if the NPC is bearded, that will at best be a prelude to discussion and planning by the players, followed by the actual declaration of actions to be resolved mechnically as Bluff or Disguise checks, etc.</p><p></p><p>I think this (first) point is true whatever means one uses for deciding if the door is open or shut.</p><p></p><p>Second, I think there are different approaches to action resolution. The door's state can be made an element in fortune-in-the-middle resolution, which is one of the ways I said that I might handle it. Equally, you could do it your way (via randomisation) or another of the ways I mentioned (PC "luck" roll - break 10 on d20 to get lucky, or whatever other odds the GM sets). If you go FitM, then the action declaration doesn't get precisified beyond "I flee" - much as, in classic D&D, melee combat declarations don't get any more precise than "I attack". If you go one of those other ways, of firming up the situation prior to fully processing the action declaration, then the action will get precisified in the sorts of ways that you describe.</p><p></p><p>I think the way one handles the second issue - about action resolution technique - can vary over the range of approaches that we have canvassed without that affecting the truth of the first point, that the trap door and it's state are intimately bound up in the resolution of an action declaration in a way that the beard is not.</p><p></p><p>(For a contrasting example with the beard, imagine the PC is in combat with the NPC and wants to declare a dirty fighting action - "I grab his beard and yank on it". At that point the beard is bound up in action resolution in much the same way as the trap door is. Personally I would find it odd to resolve the existence of the beard via FitM - because in the game it doesn't vary between states in the way a door does - but I'm sure there are groups out there who might be happy to handle it that way.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6421569, member: 42582"] I think there are (at least) two things going on here. First, whether the door is open or shut is an element in the resolution of a declared action - where the action is "I flee!" I think this is different from the beard case, where there is no declared action - if the NPC is bearded, that will at best be a prelude to discussion and planning by the players, followed by the actual declaration of actions to be resolved mechnically as Bluff or Disguise checks, etc. I think this (first) point is true whatever means one uses for deciding if the door is open or shut. Second, I think there are different approaches to action resolution. The door's state can be made an element in fortune-in-the-middle resolution, which is one of the ways I said that I might handle it. Equally, you could do it your way (via randomisation) or another of the ways I mentioned (PC "luck" roll - break 10 on d20 to get lucky, or whatever other odds the GM sets). If you go FitM, then the action declaration doesn't get precisified beyond "I flee" - much as, in classic D&D, melee combat declarations don't get any more precise than "I attack". If you go one of those other ways, of firming up the situation prior to fully processing the action declaration, then the action will get precisified in the sorts of ways that you describe. I think the way one handles the second issue - about action resolution technique - can vary over the range of approaches that we have canvassed without that affecting the truth of the first point, that the trap door and it's state are intimately bound up in the resolution of an action declaration in a way that the beard is not. (For a contrasting example with the beard, imagine the PC is in combat with the NPC and wants to declare a dirty fighting action - "I grab his beard and yank on it". At that point the beard is bound up in action resolution in much the same way as the trap door is. Personally I would find it odd to resolve the existence of the beard via FitM - because in the game it doesn't vary between states in the way a door does - but I'm sure there are groups out there who might be happy to handle it that way.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Character play vs Player play
Top