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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7809764" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>I'm unfamiliar with this jargon term, "waffle." Is it, too, from The Forge? Is it in no way golden nor crispy? (That would be a sad waffle, indeed.)</p><p></p><p><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Seriously, though....</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think the insight that resolution mechanics are nested within the DM's judge-uncertainty & narrate-results segment of the play loop is an important one.</p><p></p><p>5e undertook many ambitious goals, and two particularly important ones at which it achieved a measure of success were DM Empowerment and supporting a range of play styles.</p><p></p><p>Nesting resolution in the DMs segment of the play procedure gives him complete latitude and authority to invoke, change or override those mechanics (DM Empowerment, check) that includes shifting them to the players action-declaration segment.</p><p></p><p> It would be reasonable for a DM to instruct his players that action declaration includes the check, even roll, they're making, while his narration of results will include describing that action in the fiction. Players describing actions per G&A would be unduly complicating and delaying that DMs play loop, just as much as players calling out checks to their G&A DM would be. </p><p></p><p>That's just an illustration of 5e being able to support two different styles.</p><p></p><p>(Thus, I do think it's impolitick to say that playing 5e in a putative past-edition style is problematic. Rather, it's problematic for the players to attempt play in a different style from that the DM has chosen.)</p><p></p><p>Also, the G&A DM could resolve the perceived contradiction of combat mechanics written 2nd-person as if instructing the player to take the initiative to use those mechanics in lieu of a declared G&A, or spells lack of mechanics to resolve uncertainty as implying spells are always certain, by remembering that those natural-language phrasing and presentations are his to interpret, and ruling the former as addressed to a player in the context of uncertainty having been ruled, and the latter as merely incomplete so open to ad hoc or formal variant expansion (and they could be simple and leverage existing mechanics - like calling for a concentration when the DM judges casting to be uncertain).</p><p></p><p>...</p><p></p><p>Finally, an interesting dynamic of G&A is that players should come to recognize the desirability of narrated success over the uncertainty-resolution of a check, which carries, after all a chance of failure.</p><p>And, I'd be remiss - and risk my rep as an old cynic - if I didn't point out that the obvious interpretation of combat rules implying attacks are always uncertain impacts non-casters, the bulk of whose contributions in combat will be weapon attacks, disproportionately, while the apparent assumption of automatically successful casting just makes the system that much easier on casters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7809764, member: 996"] I'm unfamiliar with this jargon term, "waffle." Is it, too, from The Forge? Is it in no way golden nor crispy? (That would be a sad waffle, indeed.) ;) Seriously, though.... I think the insight that resolution mechanics are nested within the DM's judge-uncertainty & narrate-results segment of the play loop is an important one. 5e undertook many ambitious goals, and two particularly important ones at which it achieved a measure of success were DM Empowerment and supporting a range of play styles. Nesting resolution in the DMs segment of the play procedure gives him complete latitude and authority to invoke, change or override those mechanics (DM Empowerment, check) that includes shifting them to the players action-declaration segment. It would be reasonable for a DM to instruct his players that action declaration includes the check, even roll, they're making, while his narration of results will include describing that action in the fiction. Players describing actions per G&A would be unduly complicating and delaying that DMs play loop, just as much as players calling out checks to their G&A DM would be. That's just an illustration of 5e being able to support two different styles. (Thus, I do think it's impolitick to say that playing 5e in a putative past-edition style is problematic. Rather, it's problematic for the players to attempt play in a different style from that the DM has chosen.) Also, the G&A DM could resolve the perceived contradiction of combat mechanics written 2nd-person as if instructing the player to take the initiative to use those mechanics in lieu of a declared G&A, or spells lack of mechanics to resolve uncertainty as implying spells are always certain, by remembering that those natural-language phrasing and presentations are his to interpret, and ruling the former as addressed to a player in the context of uncertainty having been ruled, and the latter as merely incomplete so open to ad hoc or formal variant expansion (and they could be simple and leverage existing mechanics - like calling for a concentration when the DM judges casting to be uncertain). ... Finally, an interesting dynamic of G&A is that players should come to recognize the desirability of narrated success over the uncertainty-resolution of a check, which carries, after all a chance of failure. And, I'd be remiss - and risk my rep as an old cynic - if I didn't point out that the obvious interpretation of combat rules implying attacks are always uncertain impacts non-casters, the bulk of whose contributions in combat will be weapon attacks, disproportionately, while the apparent assumption of automatically successful casting just makes the system that much easier on casters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Consequences of Failure
Top