You are not aware of it in language processing terms (german or english or in the language you are used to think) but other senses are aware of it. The economy of language communication and the economy of perception are not the same thing. Of course game mechanics of tabletop rpgames run on language and arithmetic but there are also other signs to be calculated. These signs belong to the players' socializing input - an input that utilizes body language among other things for example. A system could be able to consider this kind of input -lets call it the players' social feelings- by allowing player's to input their creativity. Traditionally the best example is the Dungeon Master, but I wish there was a mechanically supported way for everyone to partecipate in some kind of way: this is what I was exploring on with the "verbal" term mentioned some post ago.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
The Impasse
- Thread starter DimitriX
- Start date
You are not aware of it in language processing terms (german or english or in the language you are used to think) but other senses are aware of it. The economy of language communication and the economy of perception are not the same thing. Of course game mechanics of tabletop rpgames run on language and arithmetic but there are also other signs to be calculated. These signs belong to the players' socializing input - an input that utilizes body language among other things for example. A system could be able to consider this kind of input -lets call it the players' social feelings- by allowing player's to input their creativity. Traditionally the best example is the Dungeon Master, but I wish there was a mechanically supported way for everyone to partecipate in some kind of way: this is what I was exploring on with the "verbal" term mentioned some post ago.
Imaro
Legend
So first, just to get this straight, it doesn't actually say... "write it down and we'll come up with something if it comes up in the game in a manner in which the results need to be randomly determined."
Instead for any action without a skill that pertains to it you... "use an ability check". How does, using this system, having Blacksmith on your character sheet mean anything. You can do this for any action you don't have a skill in right? So again you're as good a blacksmith as anything else without a skill that you try... in other words it's pointless.
Sammael
Adventurer
Not being a 4E player, I cannot describe it in great detail, but I can give at least one example which immediately springs to mind: minions.
Minions are those weaklings that if you do not focus on them they will harass you, but if you do they are no match if you manage to put them in difficulty. At least this my understanding of them. Perhaps they could have instead of one hp, 1HD and perhaps this was the initial design intent.
Why would they drop it to 1 hp? They could have seen a playability benefit on making it more simplistic. If you do not like it just give them 1HD per tier or something like that.
The point you made was that it wasn't part of 4E. It didn't say that in the books. Well, It does. Let's keep this part of the discussion about that.
This was not what you think of the rule, this was proving that it exists.
The whole page says, if the rules don't cover it, and you need to make it random, make it up using one of these methods. It is clearly part of 4E.
Last edited:
Scribble
First Post
Again this goes back to the strengths of a tabletop RPG idea.
I don't look at that and think "Oh this guy can do anything equaly well!" I'm not a computer bound to that logic. I look at that and say, if this guy is attempting something he can logically do, here is a system that can help me determine the outcome, that stays in check with the rest of the system.
Writing "backsmith" on a sheet doesn't need to give him some kind of math bonus to seperate him from a non blacksmith. It's just a way for me, as a human DM, to help determine if this character could logically make said check.
Again I don't need the game to tell me how he's able to make the check in the first place. The player and I have already determined he's a blacksmith. It just needs to give me a way to determine what happens when he needs to make some kind of check in relationship to his blacksmithery.
Imaro
Legend
So are you saying you would only allow someone who can "logically" (whatever this means) do something attempt the ability check? If so you are modding what is actually in 4e (even though this is not what was being addressed by me, as actual claims had been made to what was in the 4e corebooks, not what someone could make up.).
Again I ask, what prevents one from modding 3e in the same manner, if we are disregarding RAW and making our own rules up... then 3e isn't anymore or less a straightjacket than 4e (in fact it becomes meaningless to compare)...however if we are comparing the actual systems...4e is a less robust system than 3e in such matters.
Imaro
Legend
Emphasis mine: This was not what was stated...I didn't argue there wasn't a rule for ad-hoc actions, what I argued was that no where in 4e was there a rule that stated... write a skill on your sheet and allow the DM to make up a random way of resolution if it ever comes up. Skills besides those listed and how a player attains them are not addressed in 4e was my point. An ad-hoc action resolution system does not address being "skilled" in something.
Are you saying that making a sword is not considered an action not covered by the rules?
Or weaving a basket, or any thing else that you might need to know wether you have a success or not?
It says, if there is no skill for it, use an ability check. It says it on page 42 of the DMG.
paraphrased:
If the action is related to a skill use that check. If it is not obvious, use an ability check. Consult the table , and set the DC what you think it should be.
I really don't know how you cannot see that the page says if you think that a character should be able to do what they are asking, make it up. Here are the guidelines to keep everything (sort of) balanced.
It says, if there is no skill for it, make it up!
It says, if there is no skill for it, make it up!
Thasmodious
First Post
Exactly. The reason why PC-A can do it and PC-B can't is because PC-A made that choice already, PC-B did not.
And really, how often does a situation where you need to roll really come up in a campaign? Does a smith really need to roll every time he makes a horseshoe or repairs a bit of armor? Does a cook need to roll to fix a tasty breakfast? Does a musician need to roll to see if he successfully plays music? Of course not. The only time a roll is really needed is to do something extraordinary or in opposition to another.
