Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Adjudicating Melee
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6549767" data-attributes="member: 6775031"><p>I would rather it go the other way around. This being D&D, with all that entails, I have expectations that it <em>should</em> go the other way around whenever possible. </p><p></p><p>We have solid rules for combat because we <em>can</em> model them easily enough, but we're forced to accept vague and arbitrary rules for the other pillars because they are much more complex. If we could easily model <em>all</em> exploration, and put it into a series of predictable checks, then that would be ideal. But we can't, because situations are too variable.</p><p></p><p>Likewise with social interaction, where people are more complicated than can be summed up with a codified set of rules. (Some of the issue might be that players are more familiar with real-life social interaction than with real-life combat, so we're less ready to accept social rules that are codified poorly than combat rules which don't match up to reality.)</p><p></p><p>That's precisely what I'm saying. People expect rules to be followed, wherever they're presented. It's why optional rules are explicitly tagged as optional, even where you <em>could</em> treat <em>any</em> rule as optional. It's about managing expectations. If the rules are that the DM makes something up, then that's what we expect. It doesn't matter whether or not you buy into that. The truth doesn't require your belief.</p><p></p><p>And then there's <em>this</em> rule, which says that all other well-defined rules are just guidelines, and the DM can just do whatever. It's not even presented in the main rulebook, but is somewhere in the middle of a book that most players will never read. If you choose to invoke this rule, then you're throwing out everything that the players thought they knew about the game. That's not something you can do casually, or without repercussion.</p><p></p><p>Stakes are only part of it. Even if it was just a friendly tournament, and the only prize was pride, then I would still expect the combat rules to be followed to the letter. If the DM starts messing with the codified results, invoking "Success at a Cost", then I would not appreciate that. That it's just a friendly tournament, rather than a battle to the death, might be the difference between talking about this with the DM after the game, or just not coming back to this game.</p><p></p><p><em>The "Success at a Cost" rule is entirely at odds with everything I know and like about Dungeons & Dragons.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Crimson Binome, post: 6549767, member: 6775031"] I would rather it go the other way around. This being D&D, with all that entails, I have expectations that it [I]should[/I] go the other way around whenever possible. We have solid rules for combat because we [I]can[/I] model them easily enough, but we're forced to accept vague and arbitrary rules for the other pillars because they are much more complex. If we could easily model [I]all[/I] exploration, and put it into a series of predictable checks, then that would be ideal. But we can't, because situations are too variable. Likewise with social interaction, where people are more complicated than can be summed up with a codified set of rules. (Some of the issue might be that players are more familiar with real-life social interaction than with real-life combat, so we're less ready to accept social rules that are codified poorly than combat rules which don't match up to reality.) That's precisely what I'm saying. People expect rules to be followed, wherever they're presented. It's why optional rules are explicitly tagged as optional, even where you [I]could[/I] treat [I]any[/I] rule as optional. It's about managing expectations. If the rules are that the DM makes something up, then that's what we expect. It doesn't matter whether or not you buy into that. The truth doesn't require your belief. And then there's [I]this[/I] rule, which says that all other well-defined rules are just guidelines, and the DM can just do whatever. It's not even presented in the main rulebook, but is somewhere in the middle of a book that most players will never read. If you choose to invoke this rule, then you're throwing out everything that the players thought they knew about the game. That's not something you can do casually, or without repercussion. Stakes are only part of it. Even if it was just a friendly tournament, and the only prize was pride, then I would still expect the combat rules to be followed to the letter. If the DM starts messing with the codified results, invoking "Success at a Cost", then I would not appreciate that. That it's just a friendly tournament, rather than a battle to the death, might be the difference between talking about this with the DM after the game, or just not coming back to this game. [I]The "Success at a Cost" rule is entirely at odds with everything I know and like about Dungeons & Dragons.[/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Adjudicating Melee
Top