Search results

By the sound made by the lockpicking. It is not necessarily unlikely that a cook could hear such an attempt. We’ve already suggested many ways that it could in fact be likely. As a GM, you can choose to incorporate likely things or unlikely things. Choosing unlikely things that may seem...

See, then the problem with this is that I consider my games of Stonetop and Spire and Blades in the Dark to be just as verisimilitudinous as the trad games I play, if not more so... and I don't really care about simulation at all. I mean, as a player, if my character breaks into a rich home...

Do I see how it's different? Yes. I'm not sure if this helps reveal anything, and I think it continues to kind of misconstrue things. Specifically, I find "on a failure the cook is alerted, and a success they are not present" to be odd. It's more along the lines of "on a failure the cook is...

I have no idea what this has to do with anything. The original example was… as has been pointed out many times… flawed. The consequence should follow logically from what’s been established. A kitchen implies a cook. The failed roll means the cook has been alerted to the lock picking. A...

All the comments I keep seeing are about the cook’s presence in the kitchen. That she’s “be there either way” and the like. Her existence is implied by the kitchen, no? No, I’m explaining why I consider this kind of play to be very GM-driven, and why I expect @pemerton does as well. That...

Bad things happening more often to the unskilled?!?! What kind of insanity is that?!?! Sure… because attracting attention is a risk of picking a lock. What if they were applying a related skill? Something like Wilderness or Survival? Unless of course the attempt to lock pick attracts...

See I would read @pemerton post as either there or not there. Which seems different from both there and not there.

Okay, so the roll isn’t what triggers the encounter, but rather the PCs being in the area triggers it? But then how can you claim that the NPCs are still in the same location whether the roll says encounter or no encounter? If they were, and the trigger is the PCs also being there… then how...

Isn’t the wandering monster roll only made once they enter the area? Or once they linger too long or spend time searching an area? But then why would you make a roll? Well, this is seemingly a different process from what @Maxperson said. I am not worried about fixed encounters. I am only...

Well, I don’t mean in regard to a story. And while yes there are many games that focus on premise and character goals and the like, I just mean that anything we do in play… and I mean any game for anyone… barring some rare cases or one offs… involves the characters and the world interacting...

Honestly… I think maybe the core bit of disagreement is that I don’t think the world should be independent.

Well, it depends. If I’m actually playing a PbtA game like Stonetop… one I’ve recently played a long campaign of… then no, I wouldn’t have a map and key style inventory of who’s exactly where at what times. Instead i’d have a general idea of the kinds of people or creatures that might be...

Oh I can accept that because people are saying it… I don’t think anyone is lying. But I also expect that most folks would say that, per the rules of procedures of 5e, the GM can simply introduce an NPC whenever they want. So using a player roll that fails to take the opportunity to do so...

I’m still failing to see how successful lock picking would go undetected by potential observers. That would absolutely seem to be part of the lock picker’s skill. Sure, I see that distinction. It seems a very pointless one to make, though. It’s still a roll of dice that determines the presence...

That may be because I’m not following your logic at all… but I’ll try and clarify. Let’s say the NPCs are in location A. You’re saying they are there whether the random encounter roll is a yes or a no… that either way, that’s where they are. You’ve also said that the roll doesn’t determine...

Right but some of us are pointing out the inconsistency of attributing the cook’s presence to the roll, and then say that a wandering monster is not determined by the roll. In the case of the cook, you’re focusing on the real world reason for her being there… the die roll. But with the...

How do the locations of both the NPCs and the PCs remain the same when and encounter is both indicated and not indicated. They’re both in the same location… no?

Perhaps it does, though. It’s on the GM to have the outcome make sense. So with the cook, the GM has to come up with a sensible explanation… this is why many of us mentioned having her hear the lockpick attempt and so on. It very much seems to me that you and some other posters have decided...

So the wandering monster roll determines the PCs’ location not the monsters? That seems weird. I would think if the roll indicates a wandering monster or random encounter, then the monster or NPCs are in the location of the PCs and they meet one another. If the roll indicates no encounter, then...

So the lockpick roll… I’d use one roll to determine the outcome overall. I wouldn’t require a lockpick and then a stealth roll to pick the lock quietly, and then a stealth roll to open the door, and another to move quietly over to the cook. I actually ran a 5e oneshot this weekend because I...