Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9597671" data-attributes="member: 7006">I would imagine your way of seeing how these two sentences interact with each other allows you to be good with how you are choosing to play, and that's cool... but I know for me when I see these two things you write, I don't see any appreciable difference.&nbsp; Fudging a die roll and/or easing up on tactics and not using a creature's abilities are both the same thing to my mind-- in both cases they are the storyteller adjusting what should be the actions of the scene to change the results. So I don't see why one might be okay while the other was verboten-- to me they both should be acceptable or both not, since to me they are one and the same.Of course there is the existential &quot;wiggle-room&quot; between ignoring a die role versus ignoring an ability... the latter allows the person to justify it in their head by saying something like &quot;Well, maybe the monster just wasn't tactically savvy in that moment&quot;... whereas the former means deliberately ignoring something that actually happened (the die roll).&nbsp; So I can understand the reasoning why one might be okay with seeing them as different things.&nbsp; But for me? I think they are both just the DM trying to help out the players to make the experience the most fun it could be.&nbsp; So why bother splitting hairs?&nbsp; I don't think either one is any better or worse than the other.&nbsp; Obviously your mileage varies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9597671, member: 7006"] I would imagine your way of seeing how these two sentences interact with each other allows you to be good with how you are choosing to play, and that's cool... but I know for me when I see these two things you write, I don't see any appreciable difference. Fudging a die roll and/or easing up on tactics and not using a creature's abilities are both the same thing to my mind-- in both cases they are the storyteller adjusting what should be the actions of the scene to change the results. So I don't see why one might be okay while the other was verboten-- to me they both should be acceptable or both not, since to me they are one and the same. Of course there is the existential "wiggle-room" between ignoring a die role versus ignoring an ability... the latter allows the person to justify it in their head by saying something like "Well, maybe the monster just wasn't tactically savvy in that moment"... whereas the former means deliberately ignoring something that actually happened (the die roll). So I can understand the reasoning why one might be okay with seeing them as different things. But for me? I think they are both just the DM trying to help out the players to make the experience the most fun it could be. So why bother splitting hairs? I don't think either one is any better or worse than the other. Obviously your mileage varies. [/QUOTE]

Verification