Search results

The fiction is affected. Sometimes maybe just not as much as you'd like it to be. If there's people there to startle, sure. But if it's previously undetermined or not noted whether there's people there or not then it really does seem like the failed break-in attempt is causing those people to...

Maybe, though if the backstory (or its major elements) are a) generated randomly as part of char-gen and-or b) supplied by the DM or some other external source then subsequent immersion will be as before: you take what you've got and make what you can of it. Indeed. Or - and this has in fact...

Using only slightly different terms, this seems to be exactly what I already do: the characters (PC and NPC alike) can yell at each other all they want and the dice stay in the bag, but if-when such a dispute gets beyond words and into action such as spells, shoving, weapons, etc. then out come...

That's just it - the cook should not be in any way related to the lock picking! Two unrelated binary options giving four possible outcomes: Pick succeeds, cook present Pick fails, cook present Pick succeeds, cook absent Pick fails, cook absent You're the one who keeps trying to tie these two...

Seems to me the player's just taking what the game allows him to take. Nothing "arse" about it. If you don't want the player to take what the game gives, tweak the game so the game doesn't give it (simply asking the players not to take advantage is exactly the same tweak only soft-coded, might...

To begin with, all you've got is your own head-canon to measure against; and nobody else has anything. No problem there. After the character's been played even for just a few sessions, however, everyone else at the table has the patterns, personality, maybe alignment, etc. you've established...

One of the things we roll for during character creation is past profession, which can (on a very lucky roll) include nobility; and if you hit that then by sheer luck you could very well have resources etc. to draw on that the other characters don't. Nobody has any problems with this, though it...

Hearkens back to 1e where you had to play to your stated alignment and harsh mechanical penalties followed if the DM determined you'd drifted. Not one of 1e's better ideas.

We use 30-second rounds, still not perfect but it's an OK middle-ground between 1-minute rounds and the much shorter WotC-edition rounds. Thinking about it, though, I can't remember the last time (if ever!) someone tried picking a lock during combat; so this isn't something I've had to give any...

While 5e might have it that way by RAW, 5e rules are far from perfect and this is a good example. Picking a lock really shouldn't be do-able while in initiative (i.e. combat) as it'll simply take too long given 5e's very short combat rounds. (this is one of the rare instances where 1e's...

If there doesn't seem to be any time pressure I'll sometimes ask how long they intend to spend trying, before they start. (more often for secret-door searching that could go on all day than locks, where it's usually fairly clear fairly soon* whether or not you're going to get it - if you spend...

Most of the time IME the main considerations against taking prisoners in any numbers are one or more of: --- we're standing into further danger and if they stay with us, they'll die; but we can't spare anyone to stay behind and guard them if we leave them here where it's safe(r) --- even if we...

Oh, I am. The roll represents your best attempt over however long you're willing to give it, as an abstraction of whether you're up to this particular challenge on this particular day/time/opportunity. The only way to get another roll is if-when something materially changes in the fiction: a...

Where to me that's the GM just passing his duties off to the player. Regardless of system, a GM asking me that would get the response " <shrug> You tell me. I'm not big enough in the slave traders' union to make those decisions - way above my pay grade". Also, does the player's answer here...

Hey, flat-earthers gonna flat-earth. :) A PC can believe whatever its player likes; but if that belief's not accurate then so be it, despite anyone's protestations to the contrary.

It's a simple principle: if you don't want me to fire the last shot, don't fire the first one. :)

I got the impression from some, way upthread, that the point of non-traditional play in their view was that either the GM wasn't supposed to have an agenda in the first place or, perhaps, that the GM's ability to have an agenda was to be taken away or overwritten by the players' agenda. In...

Randomly generating the dungeon as the PCs reach it doesn't work for much the same reason: if nobody knows what's in the next room it can't be foreshadowed, telegraphed, or in any other way made to usefully interact with what the PCs can already observe ahead of time. Hypothetical example...

In fairness, maybe he does. I think it was @Manbearcat (is he even still around?) who repeatedly put it as something like aiming a firehose of [adversity? conflict? - can't remember his exact term] at the characters. If done right, this would I suppose lead more or less to sustaining conflict...

I'm kind of the other way around: disparage what I do if you like, but keep in mind I'll happily give back what I get, maybe with a bit of compounding interest attached. :)