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="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7806946" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>I want to disagree with this part about the possibility of getting false or wrong info in poor checks for PC knowledge...</p><p></p><p>"And, many find this outcome very problem causing. For one, the player likely knows they rolled poorly, so they know the information is bad but have to act otherwise. This puts a strain on authentic portrayal of the character. In effect, you've now tasked the player to play in a way that's best for the story rather than be the strongest advocate for their character possible. Also, this method involve you, the DM, providing false information to the players. This can (and usually does) erode player trust in the DM."</p><p></p><p>Your "for one..." presumes the player having to act with knowledge different from the character which is faulty. The GM can choose to reflect the roll in the narrative, presenting low rolls with info described as partial recollections or that was one among many ideas and so on... its ridiculously easy to describe bits of knowledge to reflect the roll in the narrative so that the character and the player operate from the same place of understanding. As for the latter claim that the GM providing false info in this kind of case "can (and usually does) erode player trust in the DM." well, I would say that in my experience - most notably including games with long standing and enduring trust in the GM, it is by no means "usually" the case that this hits the GM trust at all. The GM is accurately representing the results of the check in a way fitting the rules. That is the kind of thing that drives the trust. </p><p></p><p>When I present my PCs with a failed knowledge check narrative thst gives them a number of incomplete bits, a number of reasons to doubt the results and some might false but some might be true - rather than them start wondering if <strong>the GM</strong> can be trusted, they start considering how the characters can verify the bits they have that might help them. </p><p></p><p>Frankly, if players have thrircttusr eroded when the GM gives them false info on a failed check... my suspicion would be that "usuully" that trust was already on life support or at least under the weather for other reasons. Seems more like a group that sees way too much overlap between success and trust.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7806946, member: 6919838"] I want to disagree with this part about the possibility of getting false or wrong info in poor checks for PC knowledge... "And, many find this outcome very problem causing. For one, the player likely knows they rolled poorly, so they know the information is bad but have to act otherwise. This puts a strain on authentic portrayal of the character. In effect, you've now tasked the player to play in a way that's best for the story rather than be the strongest advocate for their character possible. Also, this method involve you, the DM, providing false information to the players. This can (and usually does) erode player trust in the DM." Your "for one..." presumes the player having to act with knowledge different from the character which is faulty. The GM can choose to reflect the roll in the narrative, presenting low rolls with info described as partial recollections or that was one among many ideas and so on... its ridiculously easy to describe bits of knowledge to reflect the roll in the narrative so that the character and the player operate from the same place of understanding. As for the latter claim that the GM providing false info in this kind of case "can (and usually does) erode player trust in the DM." well, I would say that in my experience - most notably including games with long standing and enduring trust in the GM, it is by no means "usually" the case that this hits the GM trust at all. The GM is accurately representing the results of the check in a way fitting the rules. That is the kind of thing that drives the trust. When I present my PCs with a failed knowledge check narrative thst gives them a number of incomplete bits, a number of reasons to doubt the results and some might false but some might be true - rather than them start wondering if [B]the GM[/B] can be trusted, they start considering how the characters can verify the bits they have that might help them. Frankly, if players have thrircttusr eroded when the GM gives them false info on a failed check... my suspicion would be that "usuully" that trust was already on life support or at least under the weather for other reasons. Seems more like a group that sees way too much overlap between success and trust. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top