Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7625644" data-attributes="member: 97077">Agreed. Arriving at an answer requires adding assumptions to both the context of the situation and the player's action declaration which are outside the scope of the original post. I think what a lot of DMs do in play is they jump to the mechanics before considering the situation and the character's efforts in relation to that situation and, based on that, whether the mechanics are even needed to narrate the result of the adventurers' actions.In the original post, we're essentially asked to assume that the player has made an action declaration that has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure (otherwise there wouldn't be an ability check in the first place). Fair enough, that's workable as a frame for the question. But then, though we know what he or she wants to achieve, we don't actually know what the character is doing. Without that, even if we take it as a given that whatever it is calls for a check to resolve, we don't know what ability score to use or what skill proficiency. Thus, we need more information to avoid the DM making assumptions and effectively establishing for the player what the character is doing. For some DMs like me, that's a no-no. I want the need for assumptions like that to be minimized or eliminated and that's just a matter of the player adequately performing his or her role.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7625644, member: 97077"] Agreed. Arriving at an answer requires adding assumptions to both the context of the situation and the player's action declaration which are outside the scope of the original post. I think what a lot of DMs do in play is they jump to the mechanics before considering the situation and the character's efforts in relation to that situation and, based on that, whether the mechanics are even needed to narrate the result of the adventurers' actions. In the original post, we're essentially asked to assume that the player has made an action declaration that has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure (otherwise there wouldn't be an ability check in the first place). Fair enough, that's workable as a frame for the question. But then, though we know what he or she wants to achieve, we don't actually know what the character is doing. Without that, even if we take it as a given that whatever it is calls for a check to resolve, we don't know what ability score to use or what skill proficiency. Thus, we need more information to avoid the DM making assumptions and effectively establishing for the player what the character is doing. For some DMs like me, that's a no-no. I want the need for assumptions like that to be minimized or eliminated and that's just a matter of the player adequately performing his or her role. [/QUOTE]

Verification