Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7806615" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Yeah, but it’s a game, so having the wind taken out of the sails is a bad thing, realistic or not.Sure, but you don’t need a check for that to be the case. If they know, they know, if they don’t, they don’t. I don’t see a check as necessary for that, and in fact asking for a check there could undermine the players’ understanding of what checks are for.A check would certainly be needed to decode the message if time was a limited resource, and in that case it might be a very difficult check, depending on the writer’s aptitude fod encoding. But this comes back to our differing opinions on how best to handle repeat checks. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I suspect if the player failed the check, you would say that the roll represents their best effort and they cannot “try again,” they’ve already tied the best they are able and under the current circumstances it is beyond their capabilities to decipher. Me, I can’t stand that kind of “Schrodinger’s difficulty.” To my mind, anything less than a natural 20 is less than the best that character was capable of. Therefore, assuming the DC is achievable for them, they will get it eventually given enough time. So, if time is not limited, we skip to the part where they eventually got it. If time is limited, each attempt will cost a certain amount of time. If you fail, you make no progress. You are welcome to try as many times as you like, but each attempt will use up precious time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7806615, member: 6779196"] Yeah, but it’s a game, so having the wind taken out of the sails is a bad thing, realistic or not. Sure, but you don’t need a check for that to be the case. If they know, they know, if they don’t, they don’t. I don’t see a check as necessary for that, and in fact asking for a check there could undermine the players’ understanding of what checks are for. A check would certainly be needed to decode the message if time was a limited resource, and in that case it might be a very difficult check, depending on the writer’s aptitude fod encoding. But this comes back to our differing opinions on how best to handle repeat checks. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I suspect if the player failed the check, you would say that the roll represents their best effort and they cannot “try again,” they’ve already tied the best they are able and under the current circumstances it is beyond their capabilities to decipher. Me, I can’t stand that kind of “Schrodinger’s difficulty.” To my mind, anything less than a natural 20 is less than the best that character was capable of. Therefore, assuming the DC is achievable for them, they will get it eventually given enough time. So, if time is not limited, we skip to the part where they eventually got it. If time is limited, each attempt will cost a certain amount of time. If you fail, you make no progress. You are welcome to try as many times as you like, but each attempt will use up precious time. [/QUOTE]

Verification