Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
An example where granular resolution based on setting => situation didn't work
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="clearstream" data-source="post: 8998251" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>That reveals a few interesting differences in modes. One motive I have for positing what I do is a conversation I had with another poster ([USER=97077]@iserith[/USER] IIRC) relating to game text they had created outlining possible consequences of D&D ability checks. One example was of aggressive, noisy birds as a consequence for failing a climb check.</p><p></p><p>How do we know in a principled way what consequences are possible? At the time, my concern was that some of the suggested twists might not be well legitimated against the fiction of situation + what player described. As I understood the climb situation, the stakes in view might well not include birds. The poster's text I subsequently accepted as demonstrating how meaningful consequences could be made broader than failing the actions of the character. Birds could very well be included in a situation and it can then be legitimated as a consequence.</p><p></p><p>Additionally, In DMG 5e a roll is made only when there are meaningful consequences. As described in the supplemental text, the birds presented a meaningful consequence (noisy and perhaps dangerous.) Raining should be in view and meaningful for it to be legitimated, else it is window-dressing... the <em>meaningful </em>result in your example remains that the attempt to persuade fails. (Although I think there is also a social consequence at the table, of the dwarf not being characterised in a tropey way, which is a strength of the approach you advocated.) Following DMG 5e consequences resolution, performance need not be all that is at stake: failures in performance often only matter in DMG 5e in view of other consequences.</p><p></p><p>Another difference is that D&D traditionally drives a forwards-going narrative. In D&D, it's normally less acceptable to retroactively add birds to a cliff just because a character fails their climb check. Those consequences need to be in view up front. That's not true of game modes that take a result and can apply it retroactively. These differences are about principles of legitimation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8998251, member: 71699"] That reveals a few interesting differences in modes. One motive I have for positing what I do is a conversation I had with another poster ([USER=97077]@iserith[/USER] IIRC) relating to game text they had created outlining possible consequences of D&D ability checks. One example was of aggressive, noisy birds as a consequence for failing a climb check. How do we know in a principled way what consequences are possible? At the time, my concern was that some of the suggested twists might not be well legitimated against the fiction of situation + what player described. As I understood the climb situation, the stakes in view might well not include birds. The poster's text I subsequently accepted as demonstrating how meaningful consequences could be made broader than failing the actions of the character. Birds could very well be included in a situation and it can then be legitimated as a consequence. Additionally, In DMG 5e a roll is made only when there are meaningful consequences. As described in the supplemental text, the birds presented a meaningful consequence (noisy and perhaps dangerous.) Raining should be in view and meaningful for it to be legitimated, else it is window-dressing... the [I]meaningful [/I]result in your example remains that the attempt to persuade fails. (Although I think there is also a social consequence at the table, of the dwarf not being characterised in a tropey way, which is a strength of the approach you advocated.) Following DMG 5e consequences resolution, performance need not be all that is at stake: failures in performance often only matter in DMG 5e in view of other consequences. Another difference is that D&D traditionally drives a forwards-going narrative. In D&D, it's normally less acceptable to retroactively add birds to a cliff just because a character fails their climb check. Those consequences need to be in view up front. That's not true of game modes that take a result and can apply it retroactively. These differences are about principles of legitimation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
An example where granular resolution based on setting => situation didn't work
Top