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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8146499" data-attributes="member: 29398">That's like saying there's a big difference between a room with only one exit and a room with ten exits but nine of them are fake and only one of them goes anywhere.By allowing one outcome to occur (whether desired or not isn't the point here) you also blocked any other possible outcomes from occurring.Where conversely I think it would be bad GMing to skip it, and I also see that bridge example as being horrible GMing advice!  Not for the actual example, but because it establishes an ethos of 'let the players get away with stuff' when it doesn't matter and thus to me makes it harder to suddenly have to enforce checks when it does matter.Consistency in rules application goes a long way toward consistency in setting and thus a solid foundation for the players to base their actions on.Or, in other words that mean exactly the same thing, GM fiat.Of course he did!  Players will always go along with the GM when the GM is giving them what they want! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I'm not sure it's the player's job to determine whether or when the action should be tested.  It's the player's job to declare the action, absolutely, but it then falls to the GM to decide when or if that action needs a test - and in this case I humbly suggest it did, then and there; in order to lay the groundwork for, and set the direction of, the fiction to come next.That sounds more like a typical player - advocating to keep what he's won. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />There may be, but if I blow a call (and hell knows I'm no stranger to blowing calls!) I willingly stand open to correction; and I think my players know this.  All too well. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Where "The GM is always right" rears its head is when a call could go either way as whatever it's based on (rule, precedent, whatever) is unclear; or - less commonly these days - the situation has simply never arisen before; and someone has to make a decision.</blockquote>

Verification