Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7801317"><p>Ah, ok. That's much more respectful. And if you don't see an issue there's no reason to change how you play.</p><p></p><p>But if you are curious about why I do see an issue, here are some things that have long bugged me about some of the more traditional ways of rolling dice:</p><p></p><p><strong>Rolling for things like stealth or forgery <em>before</em> an adversary tries to detect it:</strong></p><p></p><p>This gives the player too much information about their probable success. E.g., in the case of a really low roll, the player now knows they are likely going to fail with that attempt. So you either let them keep trying until they get a roll they like, or you force them to "roleplay pretending to not know they failed", which is not a form of roleplaying I like. Or if they roll high, they proceed with too much confidence, which I think is less fun than a little bit of uncertainty/paranoia.</p><p></p><p><strong>Making zero-consequence, "no progress" ability checks, such as "looking for traps" or knowledge checks:</strong></p><p></p><p>Again, if the player rolls low the only reason to not keep rolling until you roll well, or for everybody in the party to chime in with, "Can I roll, too?" is to arbitrarily disallow it. That feels artificial to me, and it also creates a split between the character's state of mind and the player's state of mind, in the sense that the character thinks they gave it a good shot and is reasonably sure of the result, but the player knows it was just a bad roll. That's something I care about.</p><p></p><p>On the flip side, if the player rolls a natural 20 they have no doubt about the outcome, but the character might still have doubts. "Yeah, I'm pretty sure there's no traps...but, you know, I might have missed something." Again, that sort of "being in your character's headspace" is important to me.</p><p></p><p>Now, in all these cases the DM could be making secret rolls, but that's also something I find distasteful.</p><p></p><p>A totally fair reaction to both of my constraints (shared headspace, no secret rolls) is "Well, if you're going to be so picky no wonder you have problems." But that was <em>exactly</em> my reaction to the requirement about random outcomes in the wedgie scenario: well, if you're going to insist you get a random result, no wonder you can only see one way of resolving it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7801317"] Ah, ok. That's much more respectful. And if you don't see an issue there's no reason to change how you play. But if you are curious about why I do see an issue, here are some things that have long bugged me about some of the more traditional ways of rolling dice: [B]Rolling for things like stealth or forgery [I]before[/I] an adversary tries to detect it:[/B] This gives the player too much information about their probable success. E.g., in the case of a really low roll, the player now knows they are likely going to fail with that attempt. So you either let them keep trying until they get a roll they like, or you force them to "roleplay pretending to not know they failed", which is not a form of roleplaying I like. Or if they roll high, they proceed with too much confidence, which I think is less fun than a little bit of uncertainty/paranoia. [B]Making zero-consequence, "no progress" ability checks, such as "looking for traps" or knowledge checks:[/B] Again, if the player rolls low the only reason to not keep rolling until you roll well, or for everybody in the party to chime in with, "Can I roll, too?" is to arbitrarily disallow it. That feels artificial to me, and it also creates a split between the character's state of mind and the player's state of mind, in the sense that the character thinks they gave it a good shot and is reasonably sure of the result, but the player knows it was just a bad roll. That's something I care about. On the flip side, if the player rolls a natural 20 they have no doubt about the outcome, but the character might still have doubts. "Yeah, I'm pretty sure there's no traps...but, you know, I might have missed something." Again, that sort of "being in your character's headspace" is important to me. Now, in all these cases the DM could be making secret rolls, but that's also something I find distasteful. A totally fair reaction to both of my constraints (shared headspace, no secret rolls) is "Well, if you're going to be so picky no wonder you have problems." But that was [I]exactly[/I] my reaction to the requirement about random outcomes in the wedgie scenario: well, if you're going to insist you get a random result, no wonder you can only see one way of resolving it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top