Search results

Really? Then why let the rogue roll the dice in the first place? What is the function of the rogue in a group if not be sure there is no trap (or be sure there is one) with a "critical" success? What exactly is that "something" that is lost? That a DM cannot play a dirty move on the players even...

Of course the players are entitled to see their own rolls. The roll of the die resolves uncertainty. That's what it is there for, last time I read the rules. Not letting the players see their own rolls does not resolve uncertainty but creates even more. The players are left in the dark...

Say the players decide to go east in the forest and they encounter dungeon 1 without having known that dungeon 1 is there. If they had decided to turn west and the DM puts dungeon 1 there (the players still do not know about the existence of dungeon 1) then this is lame, bland and unimaginative...

I have a question: by "choice" you mean the players know about the tower and intentionally avoid it, right? Because if the players do not know the dungeon is there at all, it does not exist in play. And as long as something (anything) does not exist in play, there a) cannot be a choice of the...

Really? Speak for yourself only please. I have been a great customer of WotC during the 4E years. They had my good will until it was clear what 5e would look like. The same is true for many people I play with. Some (or even most?) of them are still customers of WotC because of 4E and not 5e.

Here is how players are kept on an Adventure Path: 1. The DM tells them: "We are playing this Adventure Path called ______. Here is what the theme of the Adventure Path is roughly about. We need PCs who have some attachment to this theme and a motivation to follow the course of the Adventure...

I agree with you that the new edition stopped "the bleeding" that was caused by the fact that many people just did not like 4E. And I say this as somebody who really really likes 4E. On the other hand: what makes you so sure they can or have won back lots of 3e, 4E or Pathfinder players? I do...

I do not know anybody who plays 5e. I play 4E in one group and 13th Age in another. The people with whom I play 4E like highly tactical fights and the streamlined nature of this system. It is also very fluffable. Some of them took a look at 5e but got the feeling of "been there, done that"...

I get the feeling that running the trial itself will not be too engaging and fun for the players. No matter how intricate and historically accurate your framing of the court system will be, as witnesses the PCs will just be bystanders and the players will have to listen to the DM telling how the...

I agree with your assessment that some (if not lots of) People like stuff to be determined by the roll of the dice. This thread is proof to this. In 13th Age you have dailies and encounter powers. In addition, players get recharge powers for their PCs. My impression is that this is not in order...

I do not find anything unplausible with a hay wagon that is used to smuggle weapons. Something goes wrong for the smugglers. I also can see "my" players jump at this immediately. But I also think that a result like this could be found on of JamesonCourage's tables. And "his" players might pursue...

But do you really not leave success or failure up to the PCs when not rolling on a table? The result of the dice rolls will influence the situational content in the same amount as a simple pick from the table without the roll of a die because you could have rolled any result. The risk you run...

I disagree with you here. The choices made in session 0 and the things discussed there will color what the game will be about because it has a continuing influence. The character, once made, will stay the same. That choice will matter after session 0. And if a player decides to change the PC...

That could indeed be an interesting scenario.Maybe the demon hunter eventually finds out that there actually are no demons and has been fighting possessed people all along. But even then: the player's choice to be a demon hunter would have impact on what the game will be about - demons or no...

JamesonCourage: Just wanted to thank you for your reply. I get your view, even though the results of that session would not have been satisfying for me or the people I play with. But since I share the notion of your signature, this does not really matter, as long as you have fun playing this...

This does not explain why the dice rolls are necessary. It just describes which conflicts the DM thinks are relevant to the players. Which any DM will know if the conflict is played out at the table because he can see the reactions of the players/their PCs, knows their backgrounds and at least...

But player opinions always play a role in the game. In session 0,, everybody at the table regularily discusses likes and dislikes, genre, the game world etc. "I would like to play a demon hunter" shows the DM that the player wants to hunt demons. If the game ends up not being about demon hunting...

I agree. But that is what the failing forward technique is for. You still do not need to prepare a table in advance and roll on it. Less preptime, same result?

I understand that "neutrality" is the leading goal here. What I do not understand is what the added value of this is. What does it bring to the game table that any DM picking something plausible without consulting a table but instead focussing on what is the players/PCs clear story focus does...

I still do not see the use in rolling a die in this way and for this reason: if a conflict between two NPCs is relevant to the players/PCs than I would rather let them influence the outcome *because* the conflict is relevant to them. If the outcome of the conflict is not relevant to the...