If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth? - Page 156
  1. #1551
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,582
    Surely this horse is bereft of life after all the flogging?

  2. #1552
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Jose/Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    15,285
    Quote Originally Posted by robus View Post
    Surely this horse is bereft of life after all the flogging?
    Nay!

    I mean, "neeeiighhh!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Hussar View Post
    But, @iserith is saying that there is no choice. That DM centric is the default state and the presumed state of the game. If I'm playing 5e by the rules, then, by default, the rules place me front and center of the game.

    So, where's the choice there?
    You 'abuse' your Empowerment to let your players drive the game more than a conforming DM might allow. No matter how much (Em)power(ment) the game 'forces' on you, you can just turn around and delegate it to your players, no?

    Again, this is just another case of playing silly buggers with semantics.
    This is the internet, yes.

  3. #1553
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)

    Hussar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fukuoka, Japan
    Posts
    22,966
    Quote Originally Posted by Elfcrusher View Post
    /snip
    As for acknowledging "weaknesses", sure, goal-and-approach has weaknesses. Poorly implemented, or misunderstood, players may try to "talkie talkie" the DM or think it's "mother may I." Of course, those sorts of DMs and players will try to do that anyway, so honestly I'm not sure how much of a weakness it is.

    /snip
    So, the only weakness is if someone doesn't do it right. Ok.

    Quote Originally Posted by Charlaquin View Post
    /snip

    Im sorry, has anyone said that there is a 100% perfect approach with only strengths and no weaknesses?
    Didn't you ask me for cites not so long ago. There's one right there.

    And, as far as smooth vs better goes, I'm sorry, but, that's complete bollocks. My game is running smooth=good. My game is running rough=bad. That's plain English. Endless dodges don't actually change that. It's not force, but, rather, default. Please. For all the complaints about misunderstanding, you folks do seem bent on defending some pretty disingenuous points.

    Yeah, @robus is right. The other thread showed me the light. I'm already running it goal:method anyway according to @iserith, so, well, this conversation is rather pointless.

    I did try to unsubscribe once before. We'll see if it sticks this time.

  4. #1554
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Hussar View Post
    So, the only weakness is if someone doesn't do it right. Ok.



    Didn't you ask me for cites not so long ago. There's one right there.

    And, as far as smooth vs better goes, I'm sorry, but, that's complete bollocks. My game is running smooth=good. My game is running rough=bad. That's plain English. Endless dodges don't actually change that. It's not force, but, rather, default. Please. For all the complaints about misunderstanding, you folks do seem bent on defending some pretty disingenuous points.

    Yeah, @robus is right. The other thread showed me the light. I'm already running it goal:method anyway according to @iserith, so, well, this conversation is rather pointless.

    I did try to unsubscribe once before. We'll see if it sticks this time.
    I would myself push back on a definition of smooth play for RPGs as following the intended playstyle or rules. There are more than a few RPGs where the rules/playstyle either clash or where the "correct play" is anything but smooth.

    At best, smooth to me means that the play flows easily from one beat to the next. Smooth would be quick series of choices and actions resolving quickly as we go through a conflict. If we need to stop multiple times to consult different charts etc, then it's not smooth, even if its the rules as presented.

    But really, its boiling down to we need an ENW language lexicon for clear terms we can use to avoid swerving by thesaurus.

    Maybe "flarfel" can be the ENW term for "general term for favorable or better in some contexts directly related to the intended purpose and context" as in "fresh fruit is "flarfel" than rotted fruit."

  5. #1555
    Member
    A "Drizzit" Type-Thing (Lvl 28)



    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    The Stately Pleasure Dome of Xanadu.
    Posts
    7,310
    Quote Originally Posted by 5ekyu View Post

    Maybe "flarfel" can be the ENW term for
    Mmm.... I love some good flarfel .... maybe in some pita bread .... a little tzatziki sauce ...

  6. #1556
    Member
    Time Agent (Lvl 24)



    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    4,189
    Quote Originally Posted by 5ekyu View Post
    I would myself push back on a definition of smooth play for RPGs as following the intended playstyle or rules. There are more than a few RPGs where the rules/playstyle either clash or where the "correct play" is anything but smooth.

    At best, smooth to me means that the play flows easily from one beat to the next. Smooth would be quick series of choices and actions resolving quickly as we go through a conflict. If we need to stop multiple times to consult different charts etc, then it's not smooth, even if its the rules as presented.

    But really, its boiling down to we need an ENW language lexicon for clear terms we can use to avoid swerving by thesaurus.

    Maybe "flarfel" can be the ENW term for "general term for favorable or better in some contexts directly related to the intended purpose and context" as in "fresh fruit is "flarfel" than rotted fruit."
    I don't want to continue the argument of whether "smoother" means "better", because it's pointless. Smoother for whom? My games run quite smoothly, thank you very much. Claiming that a particular style is better smoother is a pointless completely subjective judgement call.

    I don't have a problem with player statement of intent DM response player action, but if that can be shortened into player stating their intent and asking if their action overcomes the obstacle*. The latter in the vast majority of cases is IMHO a swifter resolution. Faster in my games is smoother because we spend less time discussing minor obstacles.

    I guess I could get rid of all minor obstacles, but for certain scenes (chase scenes for example) those minor obstacles can add a lot of depth.

    *In my games it really depends on player preference, some players do this others don't. And yes, in a few cases I have to ask for clarification or let the player know it's not possible or whatever, but it's less than 10% ... usually much less.

  7. #1557
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,582
    Quote Originally Posted by lowkey13 View Post
    Mmm.... I love some good flarfel .... maybe in some pita bread .... a little tzatziki sauce ...
    If you're ever in Austin, TX I can heartily recommend Kebabalicious. Best falafel pita I've ever had.
    XP lowkey13 gave XP for this post

  8. #1558
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Oofta View Post
    I don't want to continue the argument of whether "smoother" means "better", because it's pointless. Smoother for whom? My games run quite smoothly, thank you very much. Claiming that a particular style is better smoother is a pointless completely subjective judgement call.

    I don't have a problem with player statement of intent DM response player action, but if that can be shortened into player stating their intent and asking if their action overcomes the obstacle*. The latter in the vast majority of cases is IMHO a swifter resolution. Faster in my games is smoother because we spend less time discussing minor obstacles.

    I guess I could get rid of all minor obstacles, but for certain scenes (chase scenes for example) those minor obstacles can add a lot of depth.

    *In my games it really depends on player preference, some players do this others don't. And yes, in a few cases I have to ask for clarification or let the player know it's not possible or whatever, but it's less than 10% ... usually much less.
    On the value of minor obstacles - absolutely. Maybe even more so. It's part of why I often use the term "challenge that matters" to deal with serious "this takes work mechanically speaking to resolve issues- where charsacterctests matter.

    A lot of lesser obstacles that don't require that much can be highly valuable but just dont require specific character elements.

    Did you stop and help the refugees with blankets, good, resources or just generally show compassion or ignore?

    As you rode in, did you stop and engage or listen to the crush of people outside the main gates who are not allowed in - or did you tuck your head and spur the mounts to get thru quickly?

    Did you take time to go to the town temple or guard post shortly after arriving?

    Did you take time to leave the traveller's wayshrine better than you left it, or worse?

    In my games, these and many more things can matter a lot yet none get a telegraphing of risk or expression of stakes and they don't get tossed aside in the interest of"how can we get more done."
    XP Oofta gave XP for this post

  9. #1559
    Member
    Orcus on an Off-Day (Lvl 22)

    Ovinomancer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    4,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Oofta View Post
    I don't want to continue the argument of whether "smoother" means "better", because it's pointless. Smoother for whom? My games run quite smoothly, thank you very much. Claiming that a particular style is better smoother is a pointless completely subjective judgement call.

    I don't have a problem with player statement of intent DM response player action, but if that can be shortened into player stating their intent and asking if their action overcomes the obstacle*. The latter in the vast majority of cases is IMHO a swifter resolution. Faster in my games is smoother because we spend less time discussing minor obstacles.

    I guess I could get rid of all minor obstacles, but for certain scenes (chase scenes for example) those minor obstacles can add a lot of depth.

    *In my games it really depends on player preference, some players do this others don't. And yes, in a few cases I have to ask for clarification or let the player know it's not possible or whatever, but it's less than 10% ... usually much less.
    This post is a good example of you not inderstanding what's being presented. Minor obstacles are quickly dealt with in my games because they don't require a check at all -- you almost always succeed outright.

    And play isn't:
    DM[in best Monty Python bridge guardian voice]: what's your goal?@
    Player: um, get to the top of the wall.
    DM: what's your approach?!
    Player: I climb it?
    DM: okay, you can pass. Next up is Bob the Fighter. What's your goal?!

    Instead, it's:
    DM: okay, you've reached the base of the outer wall, which is made of rough stone blocks. You don't see any guards. What do you do?
    Player 1: I'm going to study tge wall to determine hiw hard it eould be to climb.
    DM: Sure. The rough construction offers lots of hsndholds. It's just a matter of doing it.
    Player1: I'll climb the wall, trying to quiet in case therr are guards at the top.
    DM: good thing, too! You scale the wall and when you get to the top, there are two hobgoblin guards looking bored. Go ahead and make a DEX check to see if the've noticed you since you were being stealthy.
    Player1: I'll use (Stealth) with that. <rolls> Crud, a 12.
    DM: you're fine, these guards aren't paying much attention. The guards are chatting in goblin to each other about having to work this shift and are pretty inattentive. They have their swords, but their shields and crossbows are leaning against the oaraoet nearby. What do you do?
    XP Charlaquin gave XP for this post

  10. #1560
    Member
    Time Agent (Lvl 24)



    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    4,189
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    This post is a good example of you not inderstanding what's being presented. Minor obstacles are quickly dealt with in my games because they don't require a check at all -- you almost always succeed outright.

    And play isn't:
    DM[in best Monty Python bridge guardian voice]: what's your goal?@
    Player: um, get to the top of the wall.
    DM: what's your approach?!
    Player: I climb it?
    DM: okay, you can pass. Next up is Bob the Fighter. What's your goal?!

    Instead, it's:
    DM: okay, you've reached the base of the outer wall, which is made of rough stone blocks. You don't see any guards. What do you do?
    Player 1: I'm going to study tge wall to determine hiw hard it eould be to climb.
    DM: Sure. The rough construction offers lots of hsndholds. It's just a matter of doing it.
    Player1: I'll climb the wall, trying to quiet in case therr are guards at the top.
    DM: good thing, too! You scale the wall and when you get to the top, there are two hobgoblin guards looking bored. Go ahead and make a DEX check to see if the've noticed you since you were being stealthy.
    Player1: I'll use (Stealth) with that. <rolls> Crud, a 12.
    DM: you're fine, these guards aren't paying much attention. The guards are chatting in goblin to each other about having to work this shift and are pretty inattentive. They have their swords, but their shields and crossbows are leaning against the oaraoet nearby. What do you do?
    I made no comment on your game or your play style. None. Zero. I have no idea how quick/smooth your games are.

    All I'm saying is that arguing about something as subjective as "smoother" is IMHO pointless. What works for me and my table may or may not work for your table.

Similar Threads

  1. EN Story telling
    By megamania in forum Story Hour
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: Tuesday, 22nd July, 2003, 08:36 PM
  2. EN Story telling
    By megamania in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: Sunday, 20th July, 2003, 12:20 PM
  3. Telling your FR god to sod off
    By BiggusGeekus in forum *Pathfinder & Starfinder
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Saturday, 7th June, 2003, 12:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •