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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Pure Chaos - Letting players determine Ability Check DCs in Limbo
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="Umbran" data-source="post: 7455549" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>Whenever we ask if a thing would work, there's an implied question of "Would work <em>at what</em>?" Define "woudl work." Do you mean, "Would produce results you'd produce without their input?" Do you mean "Would make the GM's life easier?" Or what?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this could produce interesting results if implemented slightly differently.</p><p></p><p>If you are already giving a difficulty and the stakes, and are planning to reject the player input if it doesn't match that, then really you don't need the player input anyway, to be honest. If you say, "that's hard" You cold largely supstitute a static chart at that point.</p><p></p><p>However, if you instead allow the players to set the difficulty they want, an dyou make the stakes match, that's a totally different story - they get to set how big a risk they are wiling to take, you respond with commensurate reward/consequences, that'd be interesting. It might also require you to shift your game into a much more improvisational mode.</p><p></p><p>Alternatively, you might get interesting results turning this into a bidding system. Off the top of my head - give the players three stacks of different colored chips, some (possibly different) number of chips n each stack. If they spend a chip, they can set an Eash, Medium, or Hard DC (or, say, +5, +0, and -5 bonus on the check). Overall, there is balance - the GM gets to determine in general how hard things are to do throughout the adventure. But the players now get control of when those happen. If you don't put all the tasks that matter at the end, they have some tactical thoughts to make.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 7455549, member: 177"] Whenever we ask if a thing would work, there's an implied question of "Would work [i]at what[/i]?" Define "woudl work." Do you mean, "Would produce results you'd produce without their input?" Do you mean "Would make the GM's life easier?" Or what? I think this could produce interesting results if implemented slightly differently. If you are already giving a difficulty and the stakes, and are planning to reject the player input if it doesn't match that, then really you don't need the player input anyway, to be honest. If you say, "that's hard" You cold largely supstitute a static chart at that point. However, if you instead allow the players to set the difficulty they want, an dyou make the stakes match, that's a totally different story - they get to set how big a risk they are wiling to take, you respond with commensurate reward/consequences, that'd be interesting. It might also require you to shift your game into a much more improvisational mode. Alternatively, you might get interesting results turning this into a bidding system. Off the top of my head - give the players three stacks of different colored chips, some (possibly different) number of chips n each stack. If they spend a chip, they can set an Eash, Medium, or Hard DC (or, say, +5, +0, and -5 bonus on the check). Overall, there is balance - the GM gets to determine in general how hard things are to do throughout the adventure. But the players now get control of when those happen. If you don't put all the tasks that matter at the end, they have some tactical thoughts to make. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Pure Chaos - Letting players determine Ability Check DCs in Limbo
Top