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
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="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7806084" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>Personally, you're running into my dislike of the players asking the DM if they can know something. This is a personal hangup, though, and largely due to the fact that it's very difficult to come up with failure states that actually change the fiction. "You don't know" is a status quo answer that doesn't change the fiction -- the player didn't now before and now they don't know still. Sure, there's the establishing in the fiction that the character doesn't know, but that's not an especially effective change in the fiction. Then there's my personal opinion that more information is always better -- if my scenario hinges on the PCs not knowing something I've not done my (IMO) job as DM.</p><p></p><p>Instead, here, it looks like any interaction with the stones might trigger an encounter. That's fair, but then there's nothing special about the player's declared action -- not harkening back to your memories can trigger the encounter as well. This works, okay, but it feels kludgey, as if the scenario is set up so that the GM can justify a consequence to a player ask for more information.</p><p></p><p>I suppose if I had to establish something in this vein, I'd allow the player a check -- success means that these stones are like back home, but corrupted, and the player has a viable course of action to correct it by performing one of the rituals they observed to purify the site. On a failure, though, these stones are different -- still corrupt you figure, but you've no good idea how to cleanse it. In both cases, I'd set up an imminent encounter that I'd reveal now. In the success case, the PCs have options to try to cleanse the stones and halt the encounter (or mitigate it), in the fail case, the PCs can prepare a moment, but the bad is coming anyway. Or, in either, they might surprise me. Oh, the joys of the discrete packets of chaos called players.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: I misspelled imminent. I know my posts are littered with typos -- I haven't had much time lately to post at leisure or have had a lot to say quickly -- but this one, this one bothered me enough to edit. I think because I know immanent is a different word, so the difference stands out for me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7806084, member: 16814"] Personally, you're running into my dislike of the players asking the DM if they can know something. This is a personal hangup, though, and largely due to the fact that it's very difficult to come up with failure states that actually change the fiction. "You don't know" is a status quo answer that doesn't change the fiction -- the player didn't now before and now they don't know still. Sure, there's the establishing in the fiction that the character doesn't know, but that's not an especially effective change in the fiction. Then there's my personal opinion that more information is always better -- if my scenario hinges on the PCs not knowing something I've not done my (IMO) job as DM. Instead, here, it looks like any interaction with the stones might trigger an encounter. That's fair, but then there's nothing special about the player's declared action -- not harkening back to your memories can trigger the encounter as well. This works, okay, but it feels kludgey, as if the scenario is set up so that the GM can justify a consequence to a player ask for more information. I suppose if I had to establish something in this vein, I'd allow the player a check -- success means that these stones are like back home, but corrupted, and the player has a viable course of action to correct it by performing one of the rituals they observed to purify the site. On a failure, though, these stones are different -- still corrupt you figure, but you've no good idea how to cleanse it. In both cases, I'd set up an imminent encounter that I'd reveal now. In the success case, the PCs have options to try to cleanse the stones and halt the encounter (or mitigate it), in the fail case, the PCs can prepare a moment, but the bad is coming anyway. Or, in either, they might surprise me. Oh, the joys of the discrete packets of chaos called players. EDIT: I misspelled imminent. I know my posts are littered with typos -- I haven't had much time lately to post at leisure or have had a lot to say quickly -- but this one, this one bothered me enough to edit. I think because I know immanent is a different word, so the difference stands out for me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top