Search results

They got in quietly and cleanly enough to not wake anyone up.

The actual problem, I think, is that people are viewing the cook as a wandering monster when they're not. They're not there to try to stop or harm the PCs; they're a complication. It's yes, but.

The thing is, I'm pretty sure most people here would rather hear your view than the view of some guy (since you've quoted a lot of guys) who created a game ages ago.

Or because the ambusher moved against the wind, or was wearing a color that didn't blend in, or the sun glinted off the metal of their drawn weapon, or even something on the silly side like the ambusher sneezed. There's plenty of ways to do this without having magically height-altering grass.

Except, as I said, I do. So maybe you don't want to use absolutes?

I don't see what's wrong with the GM choosing. If a monster in D&D has multiple different attacks, you choose which one to use. A good GM isn't going to just spam the most powerful attack they can simply because it's the most powerful and they want to really hurt the PCs, nor will they only pick...

It's all in the description, really, and not the mechanics. Apparently I'm just good at giving scary descriptions.

Whoever made the table it controls the result. Especially if it's not just straight numbers--if there's any sort of curve, then the results are stacked by what the creator felt was more or less likely.

Why not just decide if they have a dog? How does a roll make it better, more real, more honest, or whatever other term you're going to use? It's not impartial; it's just random. Does it make sense with the fiction? OK then. If not, then don't. Your players will let you know how it feels to them.

Sure. But to the point you're plotting out everyone's movements? Nah. It's much easier to figure out the NPCs' interests and then, if the PCs go somewhere that's related to that interest, figure out if it would be logical and fun to have them there or not.

Scares the bejeebers out of the players?

I've done effective horror with D&D, so I'm sure I can do it with DH.

But we're back to the question I has several million posts ago: what do you do if the PCs decided to break into a house as a whim, not as part of a plan? Unless you are a world-class railroader, the PCs are sometimes going to want to do things you didn't plan for--and that sometimes may be a lot...

Well, yeah. The better you are at something, the fewer complications there are. And very often, the less time something takes. D&D has you picking a lock in six seconds. Or a minute, in AD&D. In real life, it can take quite a bit of time. The longer you're there trying to pick the lock, the...

This highly depends on two things: First off is how much the GM enjoys setting the scene. I'd describe it as tall grass because that provides a different feel for the location than short grass would; I enjoy describing the world and things like the length of grass help to set the scene...

And you may not know until you get in it. Here we're getting to what was Hussar's main complaint ages ago: this is an incredible amount of prep for something that really doesn't need it, especially since you can just put NPCs down when and where you need them (as long as it remains logical to...

It's also not how fail-forward works regardless of game. If the die doesn't roll high enough in D&D, you can still have other consequences besides "it doesn't work."

Nah, that's OK. I have tons of horror stuff I can convert.

But you don't understand that "failure has a cook and success has no cook" isn't how these games work. You are factually incorrect about how the rules actually work. It would be like saying that, in D&D, since spell effects don't stack, you can only take damage from one spell at a time.

That's not what I said. But it's pretty clear from what he said that he didn't quite get how the game is supposed to run, and then judged his experience on incorrect information. He's certainly allowed to not like a particular game or even a game style. But he's doing so with incorrect...