Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8166890" data-attributes="member: 16814">No, the player is still establishing what will happen on a success.&nbsp; This error you're making is that you're only evaluating a part of combat resolution against the whole of the other resolution.&nbsp; When you compensate for the scope, the entire combat through to resolution is equivalent, especially to a system that features success with cost.&nbsp; And, in combat, the D&amp;D player usually has a lot of agency in establishing the success state, because the combat rules are much tighter and feature resolution outcomes the player can leverage.&nbsp; For example, a Battlemaster fighter can deploy a maneuver where, if successful, the target is knocked prone.&nbsp; The GM may gainsay this, but will need a clear reason why to do so.&nbsp; Success absolutely results in this outcome, and the player has a say in it.&nbsp; They also usually have a say in the resolution via roll step, mostly due to build choices, but also do to any tactical elements of the combat -- like leveraging advantage or choosing to use GWM in the -5/+10 mode, etc, etc.&nbsp; These directly alter the roll mechanics and give agency here.&nbsp; The last is covered in the first -- the outcome in combat is usually pretty tightly constrained in 5e -- the GM has only a little wiggle room without deploying some clear reasons to block.Finally, you've often mistaken Story Now resolution to be all or nothing -- this isn't necessary, and it's specifically dealt with in Blades.&nbsp; Success requires movement towards the intent, but not necessarily full resolution.&nbsp; In this mode, 5e combat even moves even closer in that it's usually about moving towards your goal of killing the orc on a success, and further or with complication on a failure.&nbsp; Enough successes, and the orc is dead.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8166890, member: 16814"] No, the player is still establishing what will happen on a success. This error you're making is that you're only evaluating a part of combat resolution against the whole of the other resolution. When you compensate for the scope, the entire combat through to resolution is equivalent, especially to a system that features success with cost. And, in combat, the D&D player usually has a lot of agency in establishing the success state, because the combat rules are much tighter and feature resolution outcomes the player can leverage. For example, a Battlemaster fighter can deploy a maneuver where, if successful, the target is knocked prone. The GM may gainsay this, but will need a clear reason why to do so. Success absolutely results in this outcome, and the player has a say in it. They also usually have a say in the resolution via roll step, mostly due to build choices, but also do to any tactical elements of the combat -- like leveraging advantage or choosing to use GWM in the -5/+10 mode, etc, etc. These directly alter the roll mechanics and give agency here. The last is covered in the first -- the outcome in combat is usually pretty tightly constrained in 5e -- the GM has only a little wiggle room without deploying some clear reasons to block. Finally, you've often mistaken Story Now resolution to be all or nothing -- this isn't necessary, and it's specifically dealt with in Blades. Success requires movement towards the intent, but not necessarily full resolution. In this mode, 5e combat even moves even closer in that it's usually about moving towards your goal of killing the orc on a success, and further or with complication on a failure. Enough successes, and the orc is dead. [/QUOTE]

Verification