NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 8161190" data-attributes="member: 6779310">That the GM Never Touches the dice is irrelevant to the frequency of complications; it's really a strawman. Plus, player facing has been an option in 3.x and 4.x ... and Success with Cost is in 5th. Also note: D&D 3.x has, in both DMG versions, provisions for player facing rolls. (3.5 DMG p. 25). It doesn't have complicated success as an option in rules, but a DM minded to do so can do so easily enough. D&D 5E has Success with Cost as a variant in DMG 242. D&D 4E has skill challenges set to player facing only for balance reasons (DMG 74)There's nothing inherently nor mathematically different mechanically with player facing  only vs mixed vs GM facing only rolls... It's a MacGuffin you've been slinging about blindly, looking for a problem to solve with it. The difference is in play flow, not in outcomes; just remember when to flip the sign.Likewise success with cost - it was hinted at in the 3.x DMG. And it's implied in 4.0 as well.You've conflated it with the GM not having turns - that is the distinction you're blindly trying to beat people with, but have failed to elucidate. And that is a big difference, but is utterly irrelevant to AW as written. (Watching the Burning Wheel crowd tear into the theory with someone asking for help with the conceptuals is priceless - and you've not grasped what is different well enough to make it clear to others. That difference is that NPCs in most AWE/PBTA don't get turns per se unless a player fails a roll, when the GM gets to throw a hard move. But the most common successes are, for starting characters, success with complication, and the GM is expected to use that as a soft move for the NPCs... But in all these cases, it's still better to have more ideas than get used.</blockquote>

Verification