Recent content by Emerikol

I would argue if it doesn't happen it's not really roleplaying. What do you think playing a role is? In combat, my players will narrate their combat actions and then roll. I believe in many cases it would be better if the players just roleplayed and the DM rolled the rolls for reactions due to...

These terms are pretty foreign to me besides "sandbox" and since you are using it here I'm not sure it even means the same thing. In my campaigns, I design the sandbox ahead of time, I create major NPCS with agendas that drive events over time inside the sandbox, and I let the PCs act & react...

Well here is the situation... 1. If I have gotten in this situation then I've failed to vet my players. 2. The answer is yes and no depending on the issue but I suppose if I take it as asking is there ANY scenario here I would say yes then yes. I will say that in 1e players lost magic items...

This is excellent advice that I have also been giving for literally years. The more the hobby and playstyles diversify the more we need these sorts of conversations. No DM should want a player thorn in his side the whole campaign.

It may just be that verisimilitude is essential to the players enjoying the campaign. I seek those sorts of players. It does vary by person though and the degree it is designed also varies by person. For me though I like a high degree of it.

Well, several factors. The dice indicates something special happens. The player is going to be looking at the DM to tell him what that something is. If the DM has established any sort of precedence, the player will expect exactly that. I like it conceptually but I would want the players to...

No good deed goes unpunished EzekielRaiden. If someone disagrees with you, the interpretation of motives is always the most evil possible.

Thanks for the help. So when we talk about fail forward, I always think of the Star Wars game with that extra die that indicates some nuance on the result. Am I in the right ballpark? I'm definitely not against those things but I'd want to be careful to keep it in the DM's control. That...

I was asking what the debate, that was ongoing here, was about. I came in late so I was just trying to be sure I knew what exactly are we debating? I think with number 2 I was just saying that we've all had our say on such things. Some like a more PbtA style game or with elements of that...

Well that is the gist of it. Does the cook exist prior to seemingly popping into existence or is the cook just made up on the fly? So some questions... 1. Are we debating the mechanism (the skill roll on lockpick)? 2. or are we debating bringing stuff in that is not in anyone's mind until...

If the DM's campaign world has a cook in that home then yes, otherwise no.

What does surrender even mean here? People see these things as different. That is an undeniable fact. Read the thread. You can argue all night but that won't change. For me it is a bit weird to have a lockpicking role perform this function but to each his own. I'd probably be rolling for a...

Because they exist in the DMs world. The DM has just decide to let randomness determine WHERE they are at vs if they exist at all. They are roaming somewhere where in the world. The DM has determined them to be actors in his campaign.

We could debate semantics but lets not. I'd just say there is a difference. The DM has established the monsters that could be roaming in a given area. He has chosen to let randomness determine whether the group just happens to run into them. I think that is different than something just...

I think I started playing with crits in 1e and used them through 4e. I haven't played 5e to date. I dislike the swingyness of the d20 so the crit table might have a large section that just says: nothing further happens.