Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7939664" data-attributes="member: 42582">In the OP, quoting from the 4e DMG p 20:Narrate the results of the characters' actionsThis is reiterated on p74 , under the heading &quot;Running a Skill Challenge&quot;:You describe the environment, listen to the players’ responses, let them make their skill checks, and narrate the results.I think there is a difference between the two sets of extracts, but I don't feel that this is it. From the 4e PHB p 10, quoted in the OP:The Dungeon Master decides whether or not something you try actually works. Some actions automatically succeed (you can move around without trouble, usually), some require one or more die rolls, called checks (breaking down a locked door, for example), and some simply can't succeed. I really do not think there is a significant difference in the adjudicative funciton assigned to the GM. THis is reinforced by the quote from p 178:The DM tells you if a skill check is appropriate in a given situation or directs you to make a check if circumstances call for one. I think both texts give the GM the responsibility for adjudicating the fiction, and then establishing whether and what sort of check is required. And both set out an account of how to do that (which I haven't quoted) - in 4e this is primarily skill descriptions; in 5e it is primarily stat descriptions with skills sitting under them. (I think this is one of the better features of 5e.)I'll explain what I think the difference is in a separate post.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7939664, member: 42582"] In the OP, quoting from the 4e DMG p 20: [indent][B][B]Narrate the results of the characters' actions[/B][/B][/indent] This is reiterated on p74 , under the heading "Running a Skill Challenge": [indent]You describe the environment, listen to the players’ responses, let them make their skill checks, and narrate the results.[/indent] I think there is a difference between the two sets of extracts, but I don't feel that this is it. From the 4e PHB p 10, quoted in the OP: [indent]The Dungeon Master decides whether or not something you try actually works. Some actions automatically succeed (you can move around without trouble, usually), some require one or more die rolls, called checks (breaking down a locked door, for example), and some simply can't succeed. [/indent] I really do not think there is a significant difference in the adjudicative funciton assigned to the GM. THis is reinforced by the quote from p 178: [indent]The DM tells you if a skill check is appropriate in a given situation or directs you to make a check if circumstances call for one. [/indent] I think both texts give the GM the responsibility for adjudicating the fiction, and then establishing whether and what sort of check is required. And both set out an account of how to do that (which I haven't quoted) - in 4e this is primarily skill descriptions; in 5e it is primarily stat descriptions with skills sitting under them. (I think this is one of the better features of 5e.) I'll explain what I think the difference is in a separate post. [/QUOTE]

Verification