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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8199784" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I appreciate what he tried to do, and I get not wanting to put out specific details.  On the other hand, while nobody can write a perfect document, if you put a document like this out there you have to be open to criticism and suggestions. Taking the example of climbing the cliff specifically, I think a breakout sidebar might be good.  Explain the thought process and options.  I mean, I'm just kind of guessing as to why the climb check is even related to the birds at all.   I use variant ability/skill combos now and then.   One wizard trying to persuade someone else might be more of an intelligence check than charisma.  That half orc intimidating someone by lifting them up by the front of their shirt using strength for intimidate.  For me though, it does have to make sense in the narrative it's not just an anything goes.  But I will also say things like "Give me an athletics check, but you can use strength or dexterity because ___".Yeah, different modes of handling non-combat challenges with examples would be ideal.Maybe even just have say 2-3 narrators.  Brief blurb at the top saying what approach they like.  Then go through the different scenes and talk about how they would handle it.  No arguments, just "Here's how I'd handle it and why".  It's stuff you could probably gather reading through threads, but that can be a slog.There's nothing wrong with having different approaches but without actual concrete examples it's difficult to understand what people are saying.  You mentioning not understanding how the birds played into an athletics check is not saying the example is wrong, it's saying that we need more explanation of what the DM has in mind.As another example, in the PDF there's a line where it says: "I try to recall what I know about beetles like these."  Now this is something that as far as I can tell Iserith is really adamant on.  A player never says "Can I make a nature check to know what these beetles are?" is not allowed* I guess?  Personally I'd be okay with that because it just means the player is reminding me that they're trained in nature.Neither way is "right" IMHO, but you could do that back and forth and both sides just stating their case in a sentence or two.Last, but not least, it can be tough to have people question what you say.  But there is no one right way and feedback can be meant as constructive even if the person on the receiving end doesn't feel that way.*I tried to get clarification from him at one point but he blocked me for asking questions like this.</blockquote>

Verification