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 LIVE! 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="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7805309" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>But the “adequate description of the environment” in question - scorch marks on the wall opposite a door with a fire trap on it - does telegraph future danger before it strikes. Where do you draw the line between this and what you would consider a telegraph? At what point are the elements of the description that indicate the presence of danger no longer “impartial?”</p><p></p><p></p><p>I am very confused. The scorch marks pretty clearly establish the potential of burning to death, don’t they? Like, sure, you’ve got to be paying attention to pick up on it, but if you do, it pretty clearly lays out the danger. I also can’t speak for Iserith, but when I call for a check I state the DC and cost or consequence for failure, so there’s your clear stakes.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This seems like an entirely false dichotomy to me. I just cannot fathom how immediacy and pacing could in any way conflict with the play style you described above.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I’ve never really made a conscious effort to identify “guiding principles,” I just do what I find works well. I suppose a big one for me might be that, barring magical compulsion, players should have absolute authority over their own characters’ thoughts and actions at all times. The DM should never describe a PC’s actions or tell a player what their character “would” or “wouldn’t” do (nor, for that matter, should any other player). Related to this, the PCs’ success and failures should be determined primarily by the decisions their players make. If you get nailed by a trap, it should be because you didn’t notice the signs of its presence in the DM’s description of the environment, or because after noticing them you decided taking precautions to find and disable it wasn’t worth the time it would take, or because your attempts to detect and disarm it accidentally triggered it, not because you got a natural 1 on your Perception or Thieves’ Tools check. In the event that the outcome of an action described by a player cannot be determined by consistent application of the logic of the fiction alone, dice should be used to determine the outcome, and the player should be informed of the difficulty and risk so that the dice roll too is a conscious decision.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t disagree that there is no “secret sauce” and that you should use the right tools for the job you want to do. But I do disagree with your assessment of this “dramatic stakes” vs “referee impartiality” dichotomy you’ve set up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7805309, member: 6779196"] But the “adequate description of the environment” in question - scorch marks on the wall opposite a door with a fire trap on it - does telegraph future danger before it strikes. Where do you draw the line between this and what you would consider a telegraph? At what point are the elements of the description that indicate the presence of danger no longer “impartial?” I am very confused. The scorch marks pretty clearly establish the potential of burning to death, don’t they? Like, sure, you’ve got to be paying attention to pick up on it, but if you do, it pretty clearly lays out the danger. I also can’t speak for Iserith, but when I call for a check I state the DC and cost or consequence for failure, so there’s your clear stakes. This seems like an entirely false dichotomy to me. I just cannot fathom how immediacy and pacing could in any way conflict with the play style you described above. I’ve never really made a conscious effort to identify “guiding principles,” I just do what I find works well. I suppose a big one for me might be that, barring magical compulsion, players should have absolute authority over their own characters’ thoughts and actions at all times. The DM should never describe a PC’s actions or tell a player what their character “would” or “wouldn’t” do (nor, for that matter, should any other player). Related to this, the PCs’ success and failures should be determined primarily by the decisions their players make. If you get nailed by a trap, it should be because you didn’t notice the signs of its presence in the DM’s description of the environment, or because after noticing them you decided taking precautions to find and disable it wasn’t worth the time it would take, or because your attempts to detect and disarm it accidentally triggered it, not because you got a natural 1 on your Perception or Thieves’ Tools check. In the event that the outcome of an action described by a player cannot be determined by consistent application of the logic of the fiction alone, dice should be used to determine the outcome, and the player should be informed of the difficulty and risk so that the dice roll too is a conscious decision. I don’t disagree that there is no “secret sauce” and that you should use the right tools for the job you want to do. But I do disagree with your assessment of this “dramatic stakes” vs “referee impartiality” dichotomy you’ve set up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top