Search results

Barbarian should follow up said stabbing with the question, "Is that guy dead?"

So... If I am presenting an obstacle that can be overcome via the use of game mechanical resources, and the player is playing a pregenerated character, am I challenging the person that is playing the character, or the person who generated the character?

Its something that takes some getting used to. You can ameliorate that by watching the video at a lower speed. Takes longer though, of course.

Within the bounds of what the rest of the players will put up with. Personally, I consider it shenanigans for the DM to make rules changes outside of a few specific cases and without explicit consent from the rest of the players. Ah. Our preferences are in direct opposition here. I like...

I don't agree with that last sentence, here. The DM is not bound to the same rules as the players, because they have different roles. He is still bound to the principles of play. I'm not sure that I understand what you're saying. Does adjudicate with player experience in mind mean that the DM...

It was not that, exactly. I don't think that you would fudge it, any more than I think that you would set an unattainable DC at a goal and approach that you didn't expect but which might reasonably be thought to succeed (which, to me, is the same as fudging the result after seeing the die...

Why would you fudge it? Part of the job of the DM is to adjudicate impartially.

One thing that I have looked for in gaming chairs in the past is chairs that are rated(?) (advertised? marketed?) as being capable of supporting a good amount of weight. Some of the people that I game with are quite large, and I want to make sure that the chairs that I have in my gaming space...

You forgot to say, "Over." Over.

Most of the time, it is pretty easy to tell when someone is done talking. I mean, in most conversations, we don't formally acknowledge that we're done talking and that it is someone else's turn to do so, we simply pause and another person takes that as a cue to start. If a DM finds themselves...

This came up in one of the previous threads about 'allowing players to make rolls' or something like that, and I found it somewhat confusing then, as well as now. When I am a player, I'll often say things like... "I use oral speaking to convince the Troll King to input his dagger of friendship...

I tend to use my dagger of friendship, "I input my dagger of friendship into his NPC attitude port to see if he wants to be friends." I almost always get a positive result.

These look amazing.

So, it does not seem entirely unreasonable that you could measure the success of an "adventure" like a SC, but using the success or failure of Challenges, and the success of a campaign using the success or failure of "adventures", just sort of abstractly scaling up from one level to the next...

Yes. It is literally used as the example in the description of Insight.

Any time I see the phrase, "middle path" I automatically parse it as, "one true way".

Player motive is completely irrelevant to the adjudication of the action declaration. If we're ruling out degenerate play (i.e. someone cheating or being a jerk), then the resolution is the same, regardless of motive. There is (to me) no functional difference. I don't find that distinction...

To me, the player asking a question like this is an action declaration. Reworded, it is exactly (to me), the same as saying "[My character] remembers pertinent facts about trolls, as related to him by his uncle Rusty." Since it was stated in the form of a question, clearly it is in doubt...

So... To me, based on the description of what Insight allows you to do, a successful check can tell you not only if the person you're talking to is lying or telling the truth, but what their true intentions are, i.e. why they are lying or telling the truth. So, the interaction might be...

I am not much of a moviegoer, but I will probably go and see Wonder Woman 1984.