D&D General Testing Players

[bloodtide]

Yes. I Test and Challenge players all the time. It is a basic pillar of my game style. I think game abilities and such should ENHANCE the player using their character to overcome a test challenge. Not Replace it. I'm not a fan at all of the way a DM just says "oh your character encounters something something" and the player just rolls a dice and says "oh my character does something something".

My typical default test/challenge is roughly at the Scooby Do, Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew such level...often taken right from the cartoon or book. But for some players then get much harder ones.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes. I Test and Challenge players all the time. It is a basic pillar of my game style. I think game abilities and such should ENHANCE the player using their character to overcome a test challenge. Not Replace it. I'm not a fan at all of the way a DM just says "oh your character encounters something something" and the player just rolls a dice and says "oh my character does something something".

My typical default test/challenge is roughly at the Scooby Do, Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew such level...often taken right from the cartoon or book. But for some players then get much harder ones.

TBH, I'm not sure I fully understand your position here.

Would you ask the player to actually swing a sword or perform a magic trick in order to make physical attacks or cast spells?

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

If my character is plotting a jump, do I need to solve a problem in 11-dimensional differential geometry?

 

[bloodtide]

TBH, I'm not sure I fully understand your position here.

Would you ask the player to actually swing a sword or perform a magic trick in order to make physical attacks or cast spells?

No, much like the example though, I use puzzels or such for the players to figure out and solve in real life. All the fun ones you can find in a "science" store...or Spencers(assuming that store still exists?)

 

[Al'Kelhar]

Is that all they've got? Lame. Frankly, if you're letting your players "roll death saves" instead of stabbing them and seeing if they bleed out, you're not playing D&D as it was originally envisaged.

Cheers, Al'kelhar

 

[Older Beholder]

Could be fun, used in the right way with players that enjoy solving these kinds of puzzles.
Might not work too well when playing online though.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

No, much like the example though, I use puzzels or such for the players to figure out and solve in real life. All the fun ones you can find in a "science" store...or Spencers(assuming that store still exists?)

Pretty sure Spencer's is still around (at least Google says there's still one in three of the major malls in my city).

I guess my follow-up then would be, would you use a thing like the example for every lock the players pick, or just as some extra spice for some occasions? (That is, "some occasions" could be anywhere between "rarely but when it really makes a difference" and "not quite half the time, but pretty often.")

Maybe it's just that this sort of thing is not something I'd be signing up for if I chose to play a rogue--because I really do see it as equivalent to asking the Wizard to solve a random differential equations question every time they want to cast a spell. (And I like differential equations, at least in theory!)

 

[MichaelSomething]

Man, I really hope you meant Double Dare.

Or do I?

Why not both???

 

[jmartkdr2]

Why not both???

I'd watch that show at least once.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Oh, and I'm still playing 3.x where you can take 20? DANGIT, I though my bounded-accuracy numbers were low.

I'm...fairly sure that effective "take 20" rules still exist. They take the form of "if there's no consequence for failure, the character can automatically succeed if they take 10x the time it would normally take to accomplish the task."