Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rhenny" data-source="post: 7538656" data-attributes="member: 18333">I agree with many who hate when players calculate the odds and have to know to the % point what each action's chance of success will be.&nbsp; That ruins immersion for me as a DM and a player.In 1e, there really wasn't any action resolution mechanic.&nbsp; If an attempt seemed reasonable, we'd let it happen.&nbsp; If it was a spell, we'd try to adjudicate the spell.&nbsp; If it was a pick pocket, open lock, bend bar/lift gates, etc. we'd use the chart/listed percentage chance.In 5e, the DM basically sets a DC for action resolution.&nbsp; For the most part, when I DM and when I play, I like it when the DM allows players to auto succeed on lots of reasonable requests and only uses the dice when it would be more difficult.&nbsp; &nbsp; I agree with those who mention that knowing the DC sometimes suspends immersion, but to counteract that, when I DM, I don't tell the players the DC.&nbsp;&nbsp; I use descriptors like &quot;it will be really hard to fail at that&quot; (basically, don't roll a &quot;1&quot;), &quot;that's a moderately difficult action&quot; (DC 10-15), &quot;that's a difficult action&quot; (18-20), etc.&nbsp;&nbsp; To me, one of the best ways to keep immersion is to encourage players to describe action and intended outcome, and keep the dialogue as narrative rather than numbers.This does require that the players trust the DM.&nbsp; For me, that is paramount for creating an immersive experience.&nbsp; If the players are constantly needing to check the DM, and they are always trying to look for the mechanical reasons for success and failure, when they question the DM and argue results, the game becomes a quagmire and cannot be immersive.For me, the less dice rolling, the more immersion I usually have.&nbsp; To be honest, when I DM, a lot of the time, I just keep the game moving without die rolls, until a critical action (or I just use the really hard to fail/don't roll a &quot;1&quot; to keep the action moving along in narrative fashion).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rhenny, post: 7538656, member: 18333"] I agree with many who hate when players calculate the odds and have to know to the % point what each action's chance of success will be. That ruins immersion for me as a DM and a player. In 1e, there really wasn't any action resolution mechanic. If an attempt seemed reasonable, we'd let it happen. If it was a spell, we'd try to adjudicate the spell. If it was a pick pocket, open lock, bend bar/lift gates, etc. we'd use the chart/listed percentage chance. In 5e, the DM basically sets a DC for action resolution. For the most part, when I DM and when I play, I like it when the DM allows players to auto succeed on lots of reasonable requests and only uses the dice when it would be more difficult. I agree with those who mention that knowing the DC sometimes suspends immersion, but to counteract that, when I DM, I don't tell the players the DC. I use descriptors like "it will be really hard to fail at that" (basically, don't roll a "1"), "that's a moderately difficult action" (DC 10-15), "that's a difficult action" (18-20), etc. To me, one of the best ways to keep immersion is to encourage players to describe action and intended outcome, and keep the dialogue as narrative rather than numbers. This does require that the players trust the DM. For me, that is paramount for creating an immersive experience. If the players are constantly needing to check the DM, and they are always trying to look for the mechanical reasons for success and failure, when they question the DM and argue results, the game becomes a quagmire and cannot be immersive. For me, the less dice rolling, the more immersion I usually have. To be honest, when I DM, a lot of the time, I just keep the game moving without die rolls, until a critical action (or I just use the really hard to fail/don't roll a "1" to keep the action moving along in narrative fashion). [/QUOTE]

Verification