Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9441016" data-attributes="member: 42582">In 4e D&amp;D, that's a move in a skill challenge.In B/X D&amp;D that would either be a +1 on a reaction check (if there's no fight yet) or else would be a move in evasion resolution, where there is a % chance that the creature stops to eat the food - I can't recall what that % chance is in B/X, but in Gygax's DMG it works like this:Food, including rations and/or wine, will be from 10% to 100% likely to distract pursuers of low intelligence or below, providing the food/wine is what they find palatable. Roll a d10 to find the probability, unless you have a note as to how hungry or food-oriented the creatures are. Add 10% to the result for every point of intelligence below 5, and give a 100% probability for non-intelligent creatures pursuing. If probability is under 100%, roll the d10 a second time, and if the result is equal to or less than the probability determined, then the pursuers break off pursuit for 1 round while the food/wine is consumed.I don't see that making decisions about the fiction is &quot;rulings&quot;. That's just playing the game.When as a Traveller GM I had to decide how much chance there was of finding a broker at a starport, and what bonus Admin skill gave to that - that was a ruling. (And like the rulebook tells me to, I made a note of it for future reference.)But when as a Traveller GM I had to work with the players to determine how long it took for of a triple-beam laser to blast through ice, that wasn't a ruling. That was just adjudicating the fiction. (We Googled a scientific paper about using lasers to cut through ice, and extrapolated.)The analogy I use is this: no one doubts that, in classic D&amp;D, a player can have their PC bang on a door and thereby make a noise. That's not a &quot;ruling&quot;. It's just working with the fiction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9441016, member: 42582"] In 4e D&D, that's a move in a skill challenge. In B/X D&D that would either be a +1 on a reaction check (if there's no fight yet) or else would be a move in evasion resolution, where there is a % chance that the creature stops to eat the food - I can't recall what that % chance is in B/X, but in Gygax's DMG it works like this: [indent]Food, including rations and/or wine, will be from 10% to 100% likely to distract pursuers of low intelligence or below, providing the food/wine is what they find palatable. Roll a d10 to find the probability, unless you have a note as to how hungry or food-oriented the creatures are. Add 10% to the result for every point of intelligence below 5, and give a 100% probability for non-intelligent creatures pursuing. If probability is under 100%, roll the d10 a second time, and if the result is equal to or less than the probability determined, then the pursuers break off pursuit for 1 round while the food/wine is consumed.[/indent] I don't see that making decisions about the fiction is "rulings". That's just playing the game. When as a Traveller GM I had to decide how much chance there was of finding a broker at a starport, and what bonus Admin skill gave to that - that was a ruling. (And like the rulebook tells me to, I made a note of it for future reference.) But when as a Traveller GM I had to work with the players to determine how long it took for of a triple-beam laser to blast through ice, that wasn't a ruling. That was just adjudicating the fiction. (We Googled a scientific paper about using lasers to cut through ice, and extrapolated.) The analogy I use is this: no one doubts that, in classic D&D, a player can have their PC bang on a door and thereby make a noise. That's not a "ruling". It's just working with the fiction. [/QUOTE]

Verification