Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 8274046" data-attributes="member: 7027139">They do.I'm sure it's said somewhere more explicitly, but even the page Acrobat has opened my pdf on (26) says: "After factors are considered and the GM has announced the effect level, a player might want to trade position for effect, or vice versa." Which make sense, since an important part of making Action Rolls is the ability to trade position for effect... Which you can't do if you don't know either.Examples of play also illustrate the GM announces both.Oh, the page 27 also explains why:"By assessing effect and describing it in the fiction, the players understand how much  progress  they’re  making  and how  much they’re risking. By understanding effect, the group understands how many actions (and risk of consequences) will be needed to achieve their goals. Maybe a shallow cut is all you need to prove your point. Maybe nothing short of death will suffice. After each instance of action, effect, and consequences, the players know where they stand, and can make informed decisions about what to do next."The GM has final say on what exact consequence happens, but it's severity is already established. They just can't say "you suffer Lvl 4 harm: Electrocuted" on a botched Tinkering roll from a controlled position.I don't think I ever said that. The only example of GM fudging the DC I given was in favor of a player.Overall, it isn't about bad evil killer GMs that should be put in cages, or, even better, put down. It's also not about being 100% sure what happens (then, what's even the point of touching the dice?).It is about the difference between the GM looking at the rolled die and then just deciding what happens with practically zero restrictions and the GM looking at the rolled dice and giving an outcome we have agreed upon.If we have agreed that the position is Desperate, then "oh, you didn't hit him, try something else" won't work. Make it "oh, you didn't hit him and he shoos back. Take lvl 3 harm: nasty gunshot wound".If we have agreed that the position is Controlled, then the opposite is true.If we have agreed that the effect is Great, then "you have barely scratched him" wouldn't cut it. Make it "you've sliced him open, and his guts are spilling out of his belly".In 5E, the only thing we must agree upon is what modifiers apply to the roll. Everything else is up to GM to decide, and the player has barely any way to tell if the GM's decision was even right.</blockquote>

Verification