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
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5980157" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>I think that Imaro started to answer this pretty well, so I'll play off of his reply, and your response to that.</p><p></p><p>Okay, I disagree with your reply. In my RPG, I have a chart where I can look up hit die (1-20) and investment (no interest, hobby, interested, professionally skilled, exceptionally skilled), and it'll tell me what the bonus of that level will be.</p><p></p><p>Different hit die have also been given rough designations. For example, hit die 4 is "an average settled adult" while hit die 8 is "a very experienced or very well-trained adult." Knowing this, I can see that most guards might be hit die 4-8, and that "professionally skilled" in melee attack of that hit die will be (+7 to +10).</p><p></p><p>Now, with that knowledge, +7 to attack means something within the game world (no matter how you arrive at that number), which is you're about as good as attacking as the average settled adult who is professionally skilled at it (like a guard or soldier). You can use that number (+7 to attacks) as a concrete number to play off of in the world.</p><p></p><p>What this means, to me, as that while feats and skill ranks/training are a meta resource, the number they output at the end (bonus to skill/attack) can still give me something concrete to work with in the game. Basically, if the skilled rider wants to be as good as he says he is, he needs to get up to a bonus where that's reflected within the fiction. Prior to that point, he isn't as good as he aspires to be.</p><p></p><p>This creates the problematic (for my group) disconnect where, after the event, the PC thinks "I need to brush up on my geography" and the PC thinks "I need to boost my Ride skill." Then, the player has the choice to act as his character would (investigate learning the local area), or as he knows will benefit his character (invest more in Ride). I don't like that at all.</p><p></p><p>I agree with this, at least as far as my own group does it. As GM, I call for the skill roll of the player, and also narrate the result of the success/failure. I don't do this, of course, without the player(s) letting me know what they want to do ("I want to attempt to speed my horse up" or "I want to find a good place to hide and then hide there"). Based on their input, I ask them to roll a skill check, and then I narrate the results of it. </p><p></p><p>Well, within the context of a skill challenge, this may not be true. If the GM says that there's nowhere to progress by using the same skill again (you've already sped your horse up, you're already cutting corners, you're already jumping obstacles, etc.), then it might be time to use a new skill.</p><p></p><p>Right, this is definitely a play style thing. I'm not saying it's wrong to play that way, and I haven't been (and I know you're saying much the same thing, and weren't questioning me at all [since you didn't quote my post]). It's purely a play style thing, and I was voicing my objection to this style of play for my group.</p><p></p><p>Well, there's two ways to go about this. One, use something like a skill challenge. The other, it's not over until you've actually escaped. Did they not find you on their Perception check after you hid? Did they start to poke around, or did they move on? It's based on what they do fictionally and the mechanical results of pursuing that fiction.</p><p></p><p>You can use a skill challenge system without this being the case. You can have a situation where a Geography check is called for (terrain challenging the escaping PC), and if he fails, he runs into a gorge, pass, valley, etc. This failure (or complication) is a direct result of the "appropriate" skill check: Geography (and not Ride).</p><p></p><p>Yes, exactly. That's why I think, if you fail with a certain skill, the fiction should represent that by giving a complication involving that skill. You failed using athletics, so you aren't climbing as fast as you could be. You failed using Ride, so you've stumbled a bit by going through rough brush that you tried to jump to save time. You failed using Geography, so you've hit a gorge.</p><p></p><p>Agreed. I just like it being related to the field you failed in, so you don't get that PC/player disconnect later on.</p><p></p><p>At any rate, just my take on the subject. It's what my group prefers, but that doesn't mean it's objectively right, or anything. I'm sure your guys' groups have a blast with it your way, and that's cool. As always, play what you like <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5980157, member: 6668292"] I think that Imaro started to answer this pretty well, so I'll play off of his reply, and your response to that. Okay, I disagree with your reply. In my RPG, I have a chart where I can look up hit die (1-20) and investment (no interest, hobby, interested, professionally skilled, exceptionally skilled), and it'll tell me what the bonus of that level will be. Different hit die have also been given rough designations. For example, hit die 4 is "an average settled adult" while hit die 8 is "a very experienced or very well-trained adult." Knowing this, I can see that most guards might be hit die 4-8, and that "professionally skilled" in melee attack of that hit die will be (+7 to +10). Now, with that knowledge, +7 to attack means something within the game world (no matter how you arrive at that number), which is you're about as good as attacking as the average settled adult who is professionally skilled at it (like a guard or soldier). You can use that number (+7 to attacks) as a concrete number to play off of in the world. What this means, to me, as that while feats and skill ranks/training are a meta resource, the number they output at the end (bonus to skill/attack) can still give me something concrete to work with in the game. Basically, if the skilled rider wants to be as good as he says he is, he needs to get up to a bonus where that's reflected within the fiction. Prior to that point, he isn't as good as he aspires to be. This creates the problematic (for my group) disconnect where, after the event, the PC thinks "I need to brush up on my geography" and the PC thinks "I need to boost my Ride skill." Then, the player has the choice to act as his character would (investigate learning the local area), or as he knows will benefit his character (invest more in Ride). I don't like that at all. I agree with this, at least as far as my own group does it. As GM, I call for the skill roll of the player, and also narrate the result of the success/failure. I don't do this, of course, without the player(s) letting me know what they want to do ("I want to attempt to speed my horse up" or "I want to find a good place to hide and then hide there"). Based on their input, I ask them to roll a skill check, and then I narrate the results of it. Well, within the context of a skill challenge, this may not be true. If the GM says that there's nowhere to progress by using the same skill again (you've already sped your horse up, you're already cutting corners, you're already jumping obstacles, etc.), then it might be time to use a new skill. Right, this is definitely a play style thing. I'm not saying it's wrong to play that way, and I haven't been (and I know you're saying much the same thing, and weren't questioning me at all [since you didn't quote my post]). It's purely a play style thing, and I was voicing my objection to this style of play for my group. Well, there's two ways to go about this. One, use something like a skill challenge. The other, it's not over until you've actually escaped. Did they not find you on their Perception check after you hid? Did they start to poke around, or did they move on? It's based on what they do fictionally and the mechanical results of pursuing that fiction. You can use a skill challenge system without this being the case. You can have a situation where a Geography check is called for (terrain challenging the escaping PC), and if he fails, he runs into a gorge, pass, valley, etc. This failure (or complication) is a direct result of the "appropriate" skill check: Geography (and not Ride). Yes, exactly. That's why I think, if you fail with a certain skill, the fiction should represent that by giving a complication involving that skill. You failed using athletics, so you aren't climbing as fast as you could be. You failed using Ride, so you've stumbled a bit by going through rough brush that you tried to jump to save time. You failed using Geography, so you've hit a gorge. Agreed. I just like it being related to the field you failed in, so you don't get that PC/player disconnect later on. At any rate, just my take on the subject. It's what my group prefers, but that doesn't mean it's objectively right, or anything. I'm sure your guys' groups have a blast with it your way, and that's cool. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top