Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9511181" data-attributes="member: 7025508">Not necessarily any, but that's not the limit of this. If we accept the player ability to suggest things into being as general principle, it will do much more.Perhaps, though it will probably be way easier when the player suddenly announces that he has an invite from the king as he did a favour to him earlier, before the game began! Could have happened, seems plausible to me! If you say no, you're railroading!Are you saying that a successful check establishes the existence of the blacksmith? Because otherwise I don't see reason for any check here.So are you suggesting an approach, where we roll dice to see whether the player gets to describe the things about the setting? Like if I want there to be a secret door, I roll perception and if I succeed there is? Or that if I want to declare that the mayor owes me a favour and I roll diplomacy and if I succeed, they do? Because that's not how D&amp;D works or is designed to be played. And of course even in this sort of approach the GM can &quot;railroad&quot; by deciding which announcements require checks and which just autosucceed, and by setting DCs for the checks. Also neither 4e or 5e&nbsp; really has codified system for consequences for failure, in the same way than Blades or Apoc World has. Often the failure might just mean that nothing happens.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crimson Longinus, post: 9511181, member: 7025508"] Not necessarily any, but that's not the limit of this. If we accept the player ability to suggest things into being as general principle, it will do much more. Perhaps, though it will probably be way easier when the player suddenly announces that he has an invite from the king as he did a favour to him earlier, before the game began! Could have happened, seems plausible to me! If you say no, you're railroading! Are you saying that a successful check establishes the existence of the blacksmith? Because otherwise I don't see reason for any check here. So are you suggesting an approach, where we roll dice to see whether the player gets to describe the things about the setting? Like if I want there to be a secret door, I roll perception and if I succeed there is? Or that if I want to declare that the mayor owes me a favour and I roll diplomacy and if I succeed, they do? Because that's not how D&D works or is designed to be played. And of course even in this sort of approach the GM can "railroad" by deciding which announcements require checks and which just autosucceed, and by setting DCs for the checks. Also neither 4e or 5e really has codified system for consequences for failure, in the same way than Blades or Apoc World has. Often the failure might just mean that nothing happens. [/QUOTE]

Verification