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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Save or suck Medusa petrification
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="IronWolf" data-source="post: 5925132" data-attributes="member: 21076"><p>Excellent, someone that has summed up my thoughts without me typing paragraphs and paragraphs of post trying to arrive at that. If the rule system is codified to the degree there is no DM judgment then the DM can be replaced by a computer at that point.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And the system before provided suggested DCs for many of the skills and appropriate DCs as well. It seems when one sees a table they read that as set in stone or have a hard time judging situations that aren't explicitly covered on the table.</p><p></p><p>To me the answer isn't more tables and charts that try to encompass all of the possible situations but doing a better job of letting players and GMs know these are guidelines and the DM will need to make judgment calls.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I hate this need for a rule for everything, I much prefer the guideline style you describe below. I do feel this has been around since 3.x though.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Depending on system we have this with D&D as well and had it in 3.x as well. If I want to jump over a pit it would be jump check. Both player and DM should know the mechanic for many basic actions, though they won't necessarily know the DC.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed - this does get out of control.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The rules of several editions provide guidelines for any number of situations that need resolved through a check. Rarely does a situation come up that we can't quickly agree on what kind of check something is. In some cases a player comes up with some really cool idea of something to do and suggests what they think the most appropriate check would be. The DM frequently says that sounds good and assigns an appropriate DC based on difficulty.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think the player should necessarily know the specific DC. If they want to make a jump they should know the approximate difficulty through description or the GM saying that jump looks possible but it would be difficult. The player can then decide whether they want to try the jump, knowing they have a chance, but not a guaranteed chance.</p><p></p><p>Plus, knowing the DC simply isn't possible as a book can't outline every possible scenario. There has to be room for judgment by the DM unless we really want 4 or 5 types of jumps with no modifiers for the difficulty on a windy, rainy day.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes - looks like we might actually be on the same page! I agree. Let's stop adding more and more tables and spend more time on guiding the DM on how to turn fiction into a DC which will hopefully result in more predictable results in the long run.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="IronWolf, post: 5925132, member: 21076"] Excellent, someone that has summed up my thoughts without me typing paragraphs and paragraphs of post trying to arrive at that. If the rule system is codified to the degree there is no DM judgment then the DM can be replaced by a computer at that point. And the system before provided suggested DCs for many of the skills and appropriate DCs as well. It seems when one sees a table they read that as set in stone or have a hard time judging situations that aren't explicitly covered on the table. To me the answer isn't more tables and charts that try to encompass all of the possible situations but doing a better job of letting players and GMs know these are guidelines and the DM will need to make judgment calls. I hate this need for a rule for everything, I much prefer the guideline style you describe below. I do feel this has been around since 3.x though. Depending on system we have this with D&D as well and had it in 3.x as well. If I want to jump over a pit it would be jump check. Both player and DM should know the mechanic for many basic actions, though they won't necessarily know the DC. Agreed - this does get out of control. The rules of several editions provide guidelines for any number of situations that need resolved through a check. Rarely does a situation come up that we can't quickly agree on what kind of check something is. In some cases a player comes up with some really cool idea of something to do and suggests what they think the most appropriate check would be. The DM frequently says that sounds good and assigns an appropriate DC based on difficulty. I don't think the player should necessarily know the specific DC. If they want to make a jump they should know the approximate difficulty through description or the GM saying that jump looks possible but it would be difficult. The player can then decide whether they want to try the jump, knowing they have a chance, but not a guaranteed chance. Plus, knowing the DC simply isn't possible as a book can't outline every possible scenario. There has to be room for judgment by the DM unless we really want 4 or 5 types of jumps with no modifiers for the difficulty on a windy, rainy day. Yes - looks like we might actually be on the same page! I agree. Let's stop adding more and more tables and spend more time on guiding the DM on how to turn fiction into a DC which will hopefully result in more predictable results in the long run. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Save or suck Medusa petrification
Top