Search results

How come you don’t apply the same logic to the failed lockpick check? Why does the player’s suggestion simply prompt you to consider if there would be a farrier, and then you decide yes there would be, and then he was there all along? Why would the failed roll not simply prompt you to consider...

"Very probably"? hahahah come on man. Also, force and cause are not synonyms. You're shifting the argument hear. I didn't say you forced those things to happen... I said that you punching someone in the eye was a reason they happened. There's a difference, and you're trying to shift the...

I didn't say it is a good idea. Under what circumstances would you as GM add something to the fiction? It's not in your prep or on the map... but it winds up in the game. How? What criteria do you consider? What caused the bystander to try and tackle you? Yes, it was his decision... but why...

This isn't a gotcha. It's a question. One you repeatedly don't answer to instead answer something else I didn't ask. Under what circumstances would you add something like a guard to the fiction? Please note, I am very aware that you would NOT do so on a failed roll. You have answered that...

Adding a cook to a kitchen seems similar to you as adding a dragon or Luke Skywalker? Okay, I guess. I'm trying to look at it not in game terms, but rather as a person with a reasonable understanding of cause and effect. I'm trying to see how people will classify cause and effect. And how...

Right. Under what circumstances do you add something like a guard? Yes, see above. I asked a question that you failed to answer.

Yes... but again, you missed my point. The GM can add anything at any time, right? Or must they have everything pre-determined in map and key format? Is the GM allowed to introduce new elements as needed? Can the GM just add a cook to a situation? No, cause and effect can be direct. It can...

The point is that if the door doesn’t get opened, there’s no saving the people inside. Again, it was a simple example meant to show how cause and effect work. What’s interesting to me is that the consequence being “connected” to the die roll seems to be the issue here… yet I would expect that...

Yes, well it was a quick example that I thought folks could separate from gameplay and would then easily demonstrate the connections between actions and consequences. Foolish me! Turns out actions aren’t connected to other things and they happen in isolation!

That's what I disagree with. I think anyone looking at these descriptions that's not doing so through the lens of task-resolution traditional RPG mechanics will see cause and effect all over the place. The focus on task resolution is making you guys separate the task from the rest of the...

I asked the same question because many people have avoided giving a straight answer, or, as in your case, somehow misinterpreted the example. You thought that I was talking about the cause of the fire but that was not the case... so I clarified. My point is that there are consequences beyond...

No it doesn't. It also means no one inside is able to get out through the door. I feel like I've taken crazy pills! Yes, and I'm sure when you get home that night and your wife says "Anything interesting happen today, honey?" all you'd reply was "Well, I tried to open a door but couldn't."

I don't think there's one answer for your question here. I am only passingly familiar with Starforged, having read Ironsworn. I've not yet played or run either game. But I expect that the best way to break it up is to look at the fictional situation and think about what the goal is... what is...

The example with the burning house was in no way about the cause of the fire. Again... let's set aside the game for now and just think about the situation. There's a burning building. You try to open the door to let people out. You fail to do so. People are then burned in the fire. Do you see a...

I think this can be something that does happen with D&D and more traditionally designed games. Everything is focused on the task, and it's almost always a case of binary succeed/fail... so that can condition people to atomize each action into the task that's being attempted and look at that in...

I never claimed it started the fire. I don't even know how you would have drawn that conclusion. It's amazing to me how you guys are equivocating to avoid admitting that actions have consequences.

You just can't answer the question directly, huh? Forget gameplay for a moment. If in real life, if someone was trying to open the door of a burning house, and they failed to do so, and people inside were burned... would you describe these events as "unconnected"? It's a yes or no. What...

Not necessarily. Thethings can all be minor or all be major. The point is that they are sensible consequences of the situation. It depends on the game. If we’re talking about using fail forward in D&D, then yes, this is always an option if it’s the outcome that makes sense. Nothing that’s...

Forget the game for a moment. If you are trying to unlock the door of a burning building, and you fail to do so, and someone inside is then badly burned… you would describe these things as unconnected? That’s the question I’m asking. It’s not about rules or play priorities.

So if you failed to get into the burning house and then someone inside burned, you would consider that "unconnected" to your attempt to unlock the door? Really?