Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5611618" data-attributes="member: 22779">That's not really my issue though to be honest.&nbsp; It's not that there wasn't any other approach possible, it's that an approach that is mostly reasonable is successfully completed - the relevant skill checks are succeeded - but the results are massaged in such a way that success still results in failure.The justification for this is that success cannot result in anything but whatever the DM deems the appropriate response.&nbsp; There is no &quot;open the gate&quot; check after all.&nbsp; So, the DM takes the success and incorporates it into a response that results in failure for the PC's.That's my whole problem in a nutshell right there.&nbsp; It's not that success should equal complete and unqualified success.&nbsp; The combat example where the player wants to kill the baddie is obviously not going to happen.&nbsp; However, I would not negate the PC's successful attack by saying that a &quot;hit&quot; doesn't actually mean you do any damage&quot;.&nbsp; Because, strictly by the SRD:it specifically states the effects of hitting an opponent, unlike a skill check which is truthfully, left up to the DM's interpretation.My beef here is that the idea that the DM's interpretation should be used to negate a success.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5611618, member: 22779"] That's not really my issue though to be honest. It's not that there wasn't any other approach possible, it's that an approach that is mostly reasonable is successfully completed - the relevant skill checks are succeeded - but the results are massaged in such a way that success still results in failure. The justification for this is that success cannot result in anything but whatever the DM deems the appropriate response. There is no "open the gate" check after all. So, the DM takes the success and incorporates it into a response that results in failure for the PC's. That's my whole problem in a nutshell right there. It's not that success should equal complete and unqualified success. The combat example where the player wants to kill the baddie is obviously not going to happen. However, I would not negate the PC's successful attack by saying that a "hit" doesn't actually mean you do any damage". Because, strictly by the SRD: it specifically states the effects of hitting an opponent, unlike a skill check which is truthfully, left up to the DM's interpretation. My beef here is that the idea that the DM's interpretation should be used to negate a success. [/QUOTE]

Verification