Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8001031" data-attributes="member: 6704184">I seem to be what now? I didn't mention combat, or allude to it in any way. Its possible we draw the line between &quot;challenge&quot; and &quot;flavor&quot; differently, but so far as I can tell it isn't at combat. edit: Okay, my examples both involved the threat of combat, but general in the type of example we have all been using, guards coming upon the room and attacking is the most likely random encounter or challenge oriented time constraint. A challenge is just something that either threatens the players in some meaningful way, or something which they must overcome and which has some potential meaningful cost to overcome it. What I disagree with is the idea that such things are the only things that ever (or even just generally) need or benefit from mechanical resolution, particularly in reference to dice rolls. I mean, don't roll for stuff your group won't enjoy rolling for, by all means. But there certainly isn't anything wrong with resolving &quot;flavor&quot; elements with dice and other mechanics. The books advise using checks when the stakes matter. Doesn't need to be a challenge for the stakes to matter. But beyond that, the specifics of when a roll is worth calling for is down to &quot;does it matter to you and the players and have multiple possible outcomes?&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8001031, member: 6704184"] I seem to be what now? I didn't mention combat, or allude to it in any way. Its possible we draw the line between "challenge" and "flavor" differently, but so far as I can tell it isn't at combat. edit: Okay, my examples both involved the threat of combat, but general in the type of example we have all been using, guards coming upon the room and attacking is the most likely random encounter or challenge oriented time constraint. A challenge is just something that either threatens the players in some meaningful way, or something which they must overcome and which has some potential meaningful cost to overcome it. What I disagree with is the idea that such things are the only things that ever (or even just generally) need or benefit from mechanical resolution, particularly in reference to dice rolls. I mean, don't roll for stuff your group won't enjoy rolling for, by all means. But there certainly isn't anything wrong with resolving "flavor" elements with dice and other mechanics. The books advise using checks when the stakes matter. Doesn't need to be a challenge for the stakes to matter. But beyond that, the specifics of when a roll is worth calling for is down to "does it matter to you and the players and have multiple possible outcomes?" [/QUOTE]

Verification