Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
1e Play Report
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5845897" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>The problem here isn't that I'm not comfortable smithing up rolls on the fly. The problem here is whenever I hit one of these decision points, I'm going to pause and reflect on how I should resolve the sitution. In other words, I'm going to think to myself in very rapid succession, "What's the most fair resolution here? Should this sort of tree in this situation be resolved with a straight up ability check on a D20? Or should I used 4d6? This is a fir tree, so it does have radiating limbs, but on the other hand, the limbs might be high up. How high up are these limbs anyway? Should I apply a modifier for the type of armor being worn, because I darn sure would apply one to the thief if he tried it in a suit of plate mail? Is the math I'm proposing fair the thief player, or did I in fact just propose a resolution that made it more likely for the cleric in plate mail to climb the tree than thief cat burgular?", and so forth. </p><p></p><p>That's a burden on play. It's also a burden on play if I don't think these things, and then the player thinks, "WTF, why does my thief only have a 60% chance of climbing the tree, and the cleric in plate mail has a 70%?", or the player thinks, "WTF, IRL I've been climbing trees since I was a kid, and now my character just fell out of the tree and took 2d6 damage? How hard is climbing a tree supposed to be anyway? If it was this dangerous, why did my character even try it, instead of backing out before he got so high?" In other words, bad decisions and overly brisk decisions designed to 'move things along' can sometimes land a DM in trouble, and tends to reduce player trust. Once you lose player trust, there is a greater temptation for the player to argue with your proposed fortunes and to move from proposing actions to proposing resolutions - which is just a headache if it starts happening.</p><p></p><p>Moreover, this is a burden on play I tend to want to remove to 'design time' rather than 'play time'. I want to be able to say generally, 'This is how trees are climbed', and be able to reference that at least mentally when the player proposes to climb a tree, or else I want to be able to say "Climbing THIS tree has this difficulty.", referencing the generic system in a clear way that doesn't require me to read a lot of notes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5845897, member: 4937"] The problem here isn't that I'm not comfortable smithing up rolls on the fly. The problem here is whenever I hit one of these decision points, I'm going to pause and reflect on how I should resolve the sitution. In other words, I'm going to think to myself in very rapid succession, "What's the most fair resolution here? Should this sort of tree in this situation be resolved with a straight up ability check on a D20? Or should I used 4d6? This is a fir tree, so it does have radiating limbs, but on the other hand, the limbs might be high up. How high up are these limbs anyway? Should I apply a modifier for the type of armor being worn, because I darn sure would apply one to the thief if he tried it in a suit of plate mail? Is the math I'm proposing fair the thief player, or did I in fact just propose a resolution that made it more likely for the cleric in plate mail to climb the tree than thief cat burgular?", and so forth. That's a burden on play. It's also a burden on play if I don't think these things, and then the player thinks, "WTF, why does my thief only have a 60% chance of climbing the tree, and the cleric in plate mail has a 70%?", or the player thinks, "WTF, IRL I've been climbing trees since I was a kid, and now my character just fell out of the tree and took 2d6 damage? How hard is climbing a tree supposed to be anyway? If it was this dangerous, why did my character even try it, instead of backing out before he got so high?" In other words, bad decisions and overly brisk decisions designed to 'move things along' can sometimes land a DM in trouble, and tends to reduce player trust. Once you lose player trust, there is a greater temptation for the player to argue with your proposed fortunes and to move from proposing actions to proposing resolutions - which is just a headache if it starts happening. Moreover, this is a burden on play I tend to want to remove to 'design time' rather than 'play time'. I want to be able to say generally, 'This is how trees are climbed', and be able to reference that at least mentally when the player proposes to climb a tree, or else I want to be able to say "Climbing THIS tree has this difficulty.", referencing the generic system in a clear way that doesn't require me to read a lot of notes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
1e Play Report
Top