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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7569499" data-attributes="member: 42582">This has been discussed near-endlessly, and I would have thought you've been a participant in at least some of those threads. (Eg I discussed it in a thread a year or so ago about "secret backstory" and I'm pretty sure you posted in that thread.)No one thinks that, if a GM narrates a room with a door but no windows, the action declaration "I climb through the window" is going to have a chance of success.Instead of talking about death knights I'm surprised you're not at least pointing to a more contentious example, namely, the immunity of the Duke to Intimidate checks in the example of a skill challenge in the 4e DMG. The same example skill challenge also establishes a way of learning this immunity, namely, via an Insight check. In the past I've said that I regard this as borderline in terms of the balance between reasonable framing and GM fiat by way of secret backstory.If a group of players were playing PCs who had no magical attack forms, and the GM framed those PCs into a situation which (i) very clearly invited a violent resopnse, and (ii) involved a being able to be hurt only by magical attack forms, then in my view that would be an instance of exactly what   [MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION] is talking about. Ther proverbial ancient red dragon in the first room of a first level dungeon would be another example. (Although that example obviously rests on assumptions about the broader form of gameplay - eg it will involve exploring dungeons - which may not be true in many games.)In D&D, being told your fear effect doesn't affect the Death Kinght doesn't end the resolution process for fighting a death knight. (Unless the GM goes on to narrate The Death Knight keeps advancing . . . . and suck up your soul! Roll a new PC. Which would be a non-standard way of adjudicating combat in D&D, but would exemplify the same phenomenon  [MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION] is pointing to.)</blockquote>

Verification