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="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7807399" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>Well, I don’t change the skill list, but I do change my thinking about how skills are used. The flow of the conversation in my games is that first I describe the environment or scenario, with an eye towards things for the players to react to, investigate, or otherwise interact with. I think of this as “asking the players ‘what do you do’ <em>about</em> something,” but you might think of it as a rough analogue to an MC Move. It’s not a perfect analogy because when I ask “what do you do (about)?” it isn’t necessarily always presenting a source of dramatic conflict that demands an immediate response. It might just be presenting one or more interesting environmental features. But the idea is still to give the players something to respond to, something to spur action. I ask that the players describe their actions in terms of what they want to accomplish (the goal) and how their character attempts to do it (the approach), and I evaluate whether the approach has a meaningful chance of succeeding at bringing about the goal, a meaningful chance of failing to bring about the goal, and a meaningful cost for the attempt or consequence for failure. If it has all three of those things, I call for an ability check, not a skill check. The player than has the opportunity to suggest a Proficiency they think might help them achieve their goal. This could be a skill proficiency, a tool proficiency, a language, or even a weapon or armor proficiency if they think it will help. I will assess whether I think the offered proficiency is applicable, erring on the side of being permissive, and if it is, they can add their Proficiency bonus.</p><p></p><p>So, yeah, one consequence of this process is that rolls are only called for when there are immediate consequences. Trying to sneak up to the unwary guard or whatever, you don’t have to make a check just to become hidden - if you meet the requirements to hide in the first place, there’s really no meaningful chance of failure. But when you try to sneak up to get the drop on him, that’s something that might succeed, might fail, and has meaningful consequences. That’s the time to make the check.</p><p></p><p>Now, if the guard is aware of your presence and you’re trying to lose him, that’s a different story. Becoming hidden is less certain, and there are more immediacy consequences in that case. But the point is, roll when it’s relevant, not before.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7807399, member: 6779196"] Well, I don’t change the skill list, but I do change my thinking about how skills are used. The flow of the conversation in my games is that first I describe the environment or scenario, with an eye towards things for the players to react to, investigate, or otherwise interact with. I think of this as “asking the players ‘what do you do’ [i]about[/i] something,” but you might think of it as a rough analogue to an MC Move. It’s not a perfect analogy because when I ask “what do you do (about)?” it isn’t necessarily always presenting a source of dramatic conflict that demands an immediate response. It might just be presenting one or more interesting environmental features. But the idea is still to give the players something to respond to, something to spur action. I ask that the players describe their actions in terms of what they want to accomplish (the goal) and how their character attempts to do it (the approach), and I evaluate whether the approach has a meaningful chance of succeeding at bringing about the goal, a meaningful chance of failing to bring about the goal, and a meaningful cost for the attempt or consequence for failure. If it has all three of those things, I call for an ability check, not a skill check. The player than has the opportunity to suggest a Proficiency they think might help them achieve their goal. This could be a skill proficiency, a tool proficiency, a language, or even a weapon or armor proficiency if they think it will help. I will assess whether I think the offered proficiency is applicable, erring on the side of being permissive, and if it is, they can add their Proficiency bonus. So, yeah, one consequence of this process is that rolls are only called for when there are immediate consequences. Trying to sneak up to the unwary guard or whatever, you don’t have to make a check just to become hidden - if you meet the requirements to hide in the first place, there’s really no meaningful chance of failure. But when you try to sneak up to get the drop on him, that’s something that might succeed, might fail, and has meaningful consequences. That’s the time to make the check. Now, if the guard is aware of your presence and you’re trying to lose him, that’s a different story. Becoming hidden is less certain, and there are more immediacy consequences in that case. But the point is, roll when it’s relevant, not before. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top