G
Guest 6801328
Guest
There are rules. They're just very simple rules. The rule for what happens when someone makes a Dexterity check, is that they succeed (or fail) at a task because they were very dexterous (or not dexterous enough). The demonstration of agility is extremely important here, because that's the reason why they succeeded (or failed).
If you need to make a Dex check in order to cross a narrow beam, then the result of succeeding on the check is that your agility and coordination allows you to maintain balance. The result is not that you coincidentally happen to place your feet in the right place, even though you didn't notice what was going on; that isn't a possible result of that procedure, because that's not what a Dex check is actually checking. It's not "the same result"; the only similarity that it has to the actual result, is that you didn't fall.
What a crock of rubbish. The "result" you're describing is just a difference in narrative fluff.
Basically you're arguing that the rules dictate that only certain stories...which just happen to be the sort you prefer...may be told. Of all your theories that rigidly straight-jacket the game and limit the narrative to pre-established tropes, this one takes the prize.
As long as players who want to creatively interpret ability scores understand that doing so doesn't let them make an end run around the rules (the actual rules) then the only impact is aesthetic. And while I get that some people might be turned off by non-traditional aesthetics, really the only justification for prohibiting it is personal preference.