D&D 5E Consequences of Failure

[Charlaquin]

I have no skin in the game as far as if the combat and spell systems are compatible with goal and approach as defined in this thread.

I think it is fundamentally different in character to the play processes used outside of combat and spell use where things are resolved solely based on the fiction and what characters are trying to achieve.

I don’t think actions are ever resolved solely based on the fiction. They are resolved by a process of first evaluating their potential for success and failure based on our understanding of the way the fictional world functions, and then, if the result is in question, performing the appropriate mechanical procedure for resolving that uncertainty. It just so happens that in the fictional world(s) of D&D, magic functions under extremely reliable, predictable rules, and the appropriate mechanical procedures for resolving spellcasting actions are very rigidly defined. It also happens that violent conflict tends to involve a high degree of uncertainty.

 

[Lanefan]

Because, in GaA, the approach is an in-game (or really, in-fiction) description of how the character wants to try to get it done, not a detailing of out-of-fiction rules that the player wants to apply. Unless "spell slots" and "spell levels" are known and understood by the character, they don't belong in the approach.

The risk here, though, is that the player has to in effect say everything twice - once in flavour and again using mechanics.

Player: "I step forward a few paces and, drawing on such extra power as I have left, unleash a ball of fire with ground-zero being the goblin in the peaked helmet - I'm gonna roast these guys!"
DM: "Right. You're casting fireball - but from where? And how much extra are you putting into it?"
Player: "I move to within 15', enhance the fireball by using a 4th-level slot instead of a 3rd, and I'm centering it <points to map> right there."
DM: "Gotcha. Roll your damage."

 

[Tony Vargas]

The risk here, though, is that the player has to in effect say everything twice - once in flavour and again using mechanics.

I feel like I vaguely recall that sort of thing happening in old examples of play...?

 

[Charlaquin]

The risk here, though, is that the player has to in effect say everything twice - once in flavour and again using mechanics.

Player: "I step forward a few paces and, drawing on such extra power as I have left, unleash a ball of fire with ground-zero being the goblin in the peaked helmet - I'm gonna roast these guys!"
DM: "Right. You're casting fireball - but from where? And how much extra are you putting into it?"
Player: "I move to within 15', enhance the fireball by using a 4th-level slot instead of a 3rd, and I'm centering it <points to map> right there."
DM: "Gotcha. Roll your damage."

“Casting fireball” is already a completely diegetic action though. This could easily have gone:

Player: I cast fireball centered on this goblin.
DM: He dives for cover to try to reduce the damage as much as possible. (rolls) 15 on his Dex save.
Player: Ok, that beats my spell save DC, so he’s only going to take (rolls) 12 damage then.

Nothing about that exchange is in conflict with G&A.

 

[Lanefan]

“Casting fireball” is already a completely diegetic action though. This could easily have gone:

Player: I cast fireball centered on this goblin.
DM: He dives for cover to try to reduce the damage as much as possible. (rolls) 15 on his Dex save.
Player: Ok, that beats my spell save DC, so he’s only going to take (rolls) 12 damage then.

Nothing about that exchange is in conflict with G&A.

Perhaps, but if I'm the DM and I see the player rolling 7 damage dice instead of 5 I'm going to want to know why....

And this assumes, of course, that the player's goal is just to fry that one goblin. Maybe she's picked that one to target because there's 5 others around it. Or maybe she's really trying to light the curtains on fire to block view into this room for a few moments. Player doesn't say any of this in "I cast fireball centered on this goblin".

 

[FrogReaver]

Perhaps, but if I'm the DM and I see the player rolling 7 damage dice instead of 5 I'm going to want to know why....

And this assumes, of course, that the player's goal is just to fry that one goblin. Maybe she's picked that one to target because there's 5 others around it. Or maybe she's really trying to light the curtains on fire to block view into this room for a few moments. Player doesn't say any of this in "I cast fireball centered on this goblin".

Nor does the difficulty change depending on their goal. I cast fireball for fun. I can’t it to kill one goblin of 10. And I cast it to kill all 10 goblins. All different goals from a strictly GAA. All have the same approach as well...

I don’t see how casting a fireball fits in GAA. Square peg round hole is what it looks like to me

 

[Charlaquin]

Perhaps, but if I'm the DM and I see the player rolling 7 damage dice instead of 5 I'm going to want to know why....

Ok, so set the expectation that players state when they’re upcasting their spells. NBD.

And this assumes, of course, that the player's goal is just to fry that one goblin. Maybe she's picked that one to target because there's 5 others around it. Or maybe she's really trying to light the curtains on fire to block view into this room for a few moments. Player doesn't say any of this in "I cast fireball centered on this goblin".

I mean, if there are 5 other goblins in the blast radius, they’ll make saves too. If there are curtains in the area, they will be ignited, as per the rules text of the spell. I don’t understand what your argument is here.

Nor does the difficulty change depending on their goal. I cast fireball for fun. I can’t it to kill one goblin of 10. And I cast it to kill all 10 goblins. All different goals from a strictly GAA. All have the same approach as well...

First of all, it’s not unusual for different actions to have the same difficulty. Second of all, there is never any uncertainty with fireball, unless someone tries to Counterspell it with a lower level spell slot than you’re casting it at, and in that case you do have to make a check to resolve that uncertainty. Otherwise, you say you’re casting it, it works without a check. That is precisely how it should function under G&A.

If there happen to be goblins in the area, there is uncertainty as to whether or not they will take the full force of the detonation, so they have to make saving throws.

I don’t see how casting a fireball fits in GAA. Square peg round hole is what it looks like to me

It works exactly the same way any other action works. The DM describes the environment. The players describe what they want to do. The DM decides what happens, often relying on the roll of a die to determine the results, then narrates the results of the character’s actions.

Now, that process of the DM deciding what happens, often relying on the roll of a die to determine the results? What exactly that looks like depends on the actions the players take. Casting a spell happens to be an action that has a lot of very specific rules about how to resolve it. Most other actions are much more reliant on the DM’s judgment. But both fit just fine into the same action resolution framework.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don’t see how casting a fireball fits in GAA. Square peg round hole is what it looks like to me

The fireball would only have been a square peg in 4e.

 

[Charlaquin]

The fireball would only have been a square peg in 4e.

Nah they’re still circular, pi just equals 4 in Nentirspace.

 

[Beleriphon]

Nah they’re still circular, pi just equals 4 in Nentirspace.

Does that mean Nentir Vale has square wheels?