Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9668143" data-attributes="member: 7045806">Is this only true theoretically?In the rules as written you aren't wrong. But in practice I think there is more to look at. The social aspect in a ttrpg matters. We don't play these games in the basement, while in our underwear eating Cheetos. At least I dont. Minecraft fills that niche.&nbsp;This is important. This social aspect has a large impact on how we play. Many concessions are made in the game to this social contract. Such as how common session 0 is. Anytime the DM deviates from their own plan. It's a contant give and take between everyone at the table, in an effort to have a &quot;good time.&quot;So what happens if a DM asks for a skill check and the player rolls a natural 20 and fails? They haven’t just failed a check—they’ve had their time wasted. From a mechanical standpoint, it’s defensible: maybe the DC was 30 and the player couldn’t reasonably succeed. But from a social standpoint it's an unforced error. It's a feel bad moment. Why prompt a roll if failure was inevitable? Why ask for input only to ignore it?You can reverse this to success. Why ask for the roll? This doesn’t mean DMs must always reward 20s or punish 1s. But it does mean they should be thoughtful about why they’re calling for a check at all. If success is impossible or irrelevant, don’t ask for a roll. If you do, you’re creating a moment that asks for shared stakes and tension—and if a player rolls a 20, ignoring that moment feels like breaking a promise.So 1's and 20s don't matter because of the rules. They matter because of respect for each other's time, and for that idea that when we touch the dice, we’re all agreeing to see what unfolds together.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9668143, member: 7045806"] Is this only true theoretically? In the rules as written you aren't wrong. But in practice I think there is more to look at. The social aspect in a ttrpg matters. We don't play these games in the basement, while in our underwear eating Cheetos. At least I dont. Minecraft fills that niche. This is important. This social aspect has a large impact on how we play. Many concessions are made in the game to this social contract. Such as how common session 0 is. Anytime the DM deviates from their own plan. It's a contant give and take between everyone at the table, in an effort to have a "good time." So what happens if a DM asks for a skill check and the player rolls a natural 20 and fails? They haven’t just failed a check—they’ve had their time wasted. From a mechanical standpoint, it’s defensible: maybe the DC was 30 and the player couldn’t reasonably succeed. But from a social standpoint it's an unforced error. It's a feel bad moment. Why prompt a roll if failure was inevitable? Why ask for input only to ignore it? You can reverse this to success. Why ask for the roll? This doesn’t mean DMs must always reward 20s or punish 1s. But it does mean they should be thoughtful about why they’re calling for a check at all. If success is impossible or irrelevant, don’t ask for a roll. If you do, you’re creating a moment that asks for shared stakes and tension—and if a player rolls a 20, ignoring that moment feels like breaking a promise. So 1's and 20s don't matter because of the rules. They matter because of respect for each other's time, and for that idea that when we touch the dice, we’re all agreeing to see what unfolds together. [/QUOTE]

Verification