NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7808204" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Nice succinct definition.    Does it work for contests such as being grappled?  Goal: don't be grappled.  Hmm.  I would just assume that's the goal virtually every time.   Approach: oh wait.  Here the rules tell me to choose strength (athletics) or dexterity (acrobatics), except we've been told players aren't supposed to use game terms for some reason.  So knowledge checks.  Goal: remember some historical fact that might aid us in achieving our goal.  Check.  Approach.  Umm ... I think about it?  What else am I going to do?  How do you get specific about a thought process unless you're reminding the DM about some bit of PC background?  What's a simple and easy way to tell the DM that I'm proficient in religion but not history?What about traps? Goal: don't set off a trap. Approach:  well, one option is to just use passive perception according to the book.  Except passive checks seem to be bad as well, although that may be shifting for some people.  I can't tell.It works for some things, I just don't see much reason to not allow shortcuts (i.e. "I make a stealth check to get around the guards") when your goal is obvious and the player is just telling the DM how they're achieving the goal.Then we throw in a bunch of other things like Role of the Dice and add in "there must be a cost of failure" other than not making progress which is contradicted by the PHB entry and we're into the thousands of posts on this topic.Because I think much of this discussion is about the Role of the Dice and when to use a narrative approach versus letting the dice determine uncertainty.  Which is just discussing two legitimate styles of play on a spectrum of gaming approaches.</blockquote>

Verification