NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7797325" data-attributes="member: 97077">There are a handful of folks frequently in these discussions that implicitly or explicitly treat actions and checks as the same. I would like to chalk it up to imprecision in their choice of words, but frequently their conclusions and assertions can only be arrived at by holding that presupposition.As for disagreeing over what is or isn't a meaningful consequence for failure, it's kind of a pointless debate without all the specifics of the context in play which is impossible to account for in these discussions. Examples have proven to be problematic as the details of the example are obsessively focused on to the exclusion of the point the example is supposed to make. In actual play, whether failure is meaningful and thus pointing toward there needing to be a check is obvious. But depending on the game, those circumstances may be very infrequent, meaning that most attempts to recall lore just succeed or fail without a roll.And anyway what is or isn't meaningful is also entirely up to the DM so it will just vary and we're going to have to make peace with that. If someone wants to say that an attempt to recall lore always has a meaningful consequence for failure, well, that's their call. It's not the call I'd make, but there's little hope of convincing them otherwise as I see it. That is especially true if they view actions and checks as the same or have a mindset where they want to see more rolls in the game in general, perhaps because they think this rewards player investment in skill proficiencies or combats "metagaming."</blockquote>

Verification