Search results

Have you even bothered to google "fail forward D&D" to find out ways to use that method with the game?

The GM has more power than the players do, even in the most player-friendly of games. These rules are here to prevent an imbalance of power.

How is it good design to have your ability to make decisions about your characters actions taken away from you because of die rolls? Now, in GURPS, there are disadvantages that would make it so you're gullible or trusting or cowardly. But you choose to take those disadvantages, and at what...

It is, however, when you consistently use strawmen and bad examples to prove your point. I don't even care if you don't actually understand it; it's when you deliberately misconstrue it that I have a problem.

We're not talking about attack rolls here. We're talking about failing morale rolls and persuasion checks and thus being forced to flee or believe an NPC.

That's also not how it works. OK, do you know the term whump as used in fanfic? If not, it's basically how some (many) fanfic writers will put their characters through hell. So it's kind of like that--you're a fan of the PCs, so you keep putting them in hard situations that they have to...

The problem then is that you want consistent rules for something that, as you say, isn't consistent. Trauma--long term type trauma, like what you're talking about--should be an opt-in experience for several reasons. If its enforced via a die roll, then as I said before, it prevents you from...

Because you continue to misrepresent it as being nonsensical "quantum screaming cook." Maybe if you actually acknowledged what it really was instead of continually using strawmen, we would accept it was a preference rather than, well, the conservatism of a D&D fan.

You missed tons. Guard dog. Lockpick breaking. Lock breaking or jamming. Door locks behind them, meaning the PC has to pick the lock again in order to exit through that door. Penalty to further lockpicking rolls in that house because the locks are unusual. Trigger a trap (if they hadn't...

Well, it's their character, so they should know if its in character or not. (And "it's what my character would do" is only a problem if the player is using it as an excuse to be an antisocial jerk.) Assuming a game that's anything other than mostly normal people doing mostly normal people...

Then you pick a different possibility. Many, many of them have been brought up in this thread alone.

The problem is that rules like morale or Persuasion checks is that they make people play not in character. They have to run away because the dice say they do, not because it's in character for them to run away. They have to believe an NPC or accept someone's arguments because the dice say they...

And for the last time, many of us have said that this was a bad example. Why do you keep bringing it up like it's the end-all and be-all of fail forward design?

There's no way to enforce this. A PC can accept being persuaded and then change their mind back to their original position later on. A PC can accept that morale is broken and run away and then immediately restart their attack. If there's a reward or penalty, the players will weigh the benefits...

The rules don't need to spell everything out, because the writers assume that the players and GM have an imagination. For instance, if you fail a stealth check, the rules don't say how. But you probably wouldn't use the following: Instead you'd say something like "I stepped on a twig." Even...

Everything you do adds to the fiction. Narrating that the kitchen is completely empty of people adds to the fiction. If you succeed on the lockpicking, then you managed to do so without complications. If there is a cook, they didn't hear you. It doesn't necessarily mean that you made no...

But you're constantly shifting lanes every time you have to roll the dice. Every time you do so, you're reminded that your characters aren't real and their lives are controlled by little plastic shapes and a set of rules, more so then suddenly switching characters. So how is the world building...

No. You're supposed to play your character not as an idiot, but as someone who acts like a normal person does. D&D PCs do not act like normal people. They act like people who expect terrible things to happen to them at any moment for no good reason--because that reason is actually "the GM...

If you succeed at picking a lock, your pick grabs the pins or whatever and moves them correctly. If you fail, its because your pick didn't grab the pins or whatever correctly. Your lock isn't waving around in air because there's very little room in that lock. Your pick hitting things it...