Search results

Never mind. Not worth it. I see where this would be going.

Sorry, this quantum nonsense is getting tedious. Yes, someone did use the word "quantum" about a phenomenom they didn't like and that they thought had associations with quantum mechanics. There was a bit back and forth until I stepped in as an actual MSc And validated both side's conception of...

But, but - what about that menachled halfling child? :O ;)

I have never made any such claims. Anyone using belivability and realism as synonyms are using the words differently than me. I am not using the word verisimilitude, as I honestly do not know understand the important neuances of that term. What you describe appear like a kind of realism I do not...

I didn't. The context was a reply to a forum thread, where I happened to talk about this particular procedure.

Which game doesn't matter, as long as it doesn't bind the GM to do otherwise. In which case, refer to your game rules. Edit: "Well established game procedure" refers to that this is such a well known way of doing things, that I expect everyone still posting in this thread to be aware of it's...

Of course we don't need to go trough this rigmarole. That just happens to be a way many find produces a more believable experience than the proposed alternative. And on that point: that real world locks generally are differentiated in how long it takes to break them is true. However games have...

But time/noise do have a mechanism for being handled. That is what the random encounter roll is for! If the ruleset specifies the time needed for a pick lock check, you roll the aproperiate number of wandering monsters. If it is indeed noisy then that normally triggers a wandering monster check...

Ok, I think I start seeing a pattern here now. I really think it might be something essential to unpack in the word "traditional". In most of the games I have played and GMed your description matches the experience 100%. I think in some of these games this is a genuine consensus - the players...

I am short on alloted time. So just two-three quick comments. Your first part is mostly fine. But I am still pretty sure if you show up on an adventurers league game as a DM and start narrating regular failures in a similar way as people expect crit failures to be narrated, you will be called...

I totally get and agree to the last part. Guess how much prep work I did each week in the 3 homebrew campaigns I talked about? Absolutely nothing beyond thinking. The exception was when I in 2 of them ran a prewritten adventure as we wanted a change of pace. There was a bit of prep reading and...

Ok, I am absolutely certain that we play very differently. But I think that is due to other dimensions of preference than wish for player input. The issue of respecting player input is as you can imagine very close to my heart. So if you can give me som guidance on how you envision trad is...

I really appreciate this! It really helps me try to structure my own thinking. I think this made me make a huge realization. I was thinking back to when I myself are happily introducing complications as a GM. I found that the main situation this is happening is when framing a scene. Now an...

This was the qualifier for Campbell: And this was the one from AbdulAlhazred: Unless I have somehow completely misunderstood your example it seem like at least Campbell's condition should be valid for MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic? However it is true that I cannot properly identify if you were engaging...

This is me reflecting back how I read some of the participants in this thread writing. If you think this is misrepresenting it, this is giving you an opportunity to clarify any misunderstandings. I absolutely do not do it. I assume people are honest in what they are writing, and from what they...

Thank you! I think you have soundly refuted my PS. But this extensive treaty leaves another open question for me. The context of the PS was related to a claim that these principles would be guiding the GM in a way that would prevent them from choosing fail forward consequences that is breaking...

But in both these examples there was no change in situation beyond new information being established? So I guess it doesn't make them exactly classroom examples of fail forward according to @AbdulAlhazred at least? And the concern about the consequence should be matching character intent or...

Ok, guess I read the entry incorrectly. I thought the "but" was reflecting back on the answer to the question. But it is rather that you get to ask the question, but have to be prepared for the worst anyway. Thank you for clarifying! I don't think this is the only game affected by this...

You might want to have a chat with @Campbell and @AbdulAlhazred ref the posts quoted in They both liked this attempt at summarising their positions. I am just the messager.

If what the players want is so precious to them, maybe you should consider have that drive the story for a while, rather than denying it based on a single roll, and insert your own completely unrelated GM decided thing to do instead? A failed roll is still a loss without destroying the price...