Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8199749" data-attributes="member: 71699">And on the other hand, I must really give credit for people being willing to put their concepts in writing to share with others. The fact is that [USER=97077]@iserith[/USER]  has taken the trouble to provide a point of reference. What is good in the guide is that he considers passive checks as well as active, and - rather too assiduously for me - concerns himself with immediate consequences.I would say not every consequence needs to be immediate, and some can just be inherent in the check, like failing a check to recall an important bit of information. It's hard to really capture play at the table in written dialogue and I think one can sense that in a certain over-brightness and over-specificity of the player-DM exchange. While I can see that creative application of the rules is helpful encouragement, a guide might take more care to arise in an explicable way from RAW.And then again, I'm also starting to think DM's should be more open to variant skill checks. I'm conflicted, as I believe it is important to vest each ability with value and not let dump stats be without consequence by allowing glib players to fall back onto their primary or secondary abilities. On the other hand, there do seem to be scenarios where a variant application makes sense. Of course, that would need to be called out if in a guide.That could add a lot of value. I mean, one can hardly complain if the person doing the writing does not serve ones every wish, but on the other hand, it would be good to see alternative ways to play out the same case. You mean also in different DMing modes, right?</blockquote>

Verification