Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MNblockhead" data-source="post: 7020361" data-attributes="member: 6796661">Let me clarify. I don't in my games, parse every single action forcing a roll for every possible skill check. Most of the time, i take a theater of the mind, narrative approach. If it is an attack, I just let the attack roll speak for itself rather than make the player roll skill checks and the attack roll. PLAYER: &quot;I run at the drunken barbarian who is about to cleave the wizard, leap to the table, springboard from it, and plunge my sword into his chest, hopefully knocking him prone in the process.&quot;In this case, as a DM, I will generally just let them roll their attack. If the attack is a success, the player does what he says. I don't make him roll an athletics check, and an acrobatics check, and a intelligence (investigation) check to find the right angle, etc.&nbsp;&nbsp; Depending on the narrative importance of the battle, I may, or may not require a contested roll to see if the barbarian is knocked down. Otherwise I would have the barbarian just make a saving throw or, if the player rolled well or if the player is much more powerful than the barbarian, I would hand wave it and have the barbarian fall prone. Note my liberal use of the word &quot;generally.&quot;There are times when a party member tries to do something truly heroic (or outstandingly reckless) at a time when success and failure have great narrative importance. In those situations, I may require a skill check as part of, for example, the player's move action. If the rogue wants to jump from the cliff, onto the giant, and stab him in the eye just before the giant is about to stomp on his unconscious comrade... I dunno... seems like that is more than a move action and attack. Seems more likely to fail and seems that success should feel hard won.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MNblockhead, post: 7020361, member: 6796661"] Let me clarify. I don't in my games, parse every single action forcing a roll for every possible skill check. Most of the time, i take a theater of the mind, narrative approach. If it is an attack, I just let the attack roll speak for itself rather than make the player roll skill checks and the attack roll. PLAYER: "I run at the drunken barbarian who is about to cleave the wizard, leap to the table, springboard from it, and plunge my sword into his chest, hopefully knocking him prone in the process." In this case, as a DM, I will generally just let them roll their attack. If the attack is a success, the player does what he says. I don't make him roll an athletics check, and an acrobatics check, and a intelligence (investigation) check to find the right angle, etc. Depending on the narrative importance of the battle, I may, or may not require a contested roll to see if the barbarian is knocked down. Otherwise I would have the barbarian just make a saving throw or, if the player rolled well or if the player is much more powerful than the barbarian, I would hand wave it and have the barbarian fall prone. Note my liberal use of the word "generally." There are times when a party member tries to do something truly heroic (or outstandingly reckless) at a time when success and failure have great narrative importance. In those situations, I may require a skill check as part of, for example, the player's move action. If the rogue wants to jump from the cliff, onto the giant, and stab him in the eye just before the giant is about to stomp on his unconscious comrade... I dunno... seems like that is more than a move action and attack. Seems more likely to fail and seems that success should feel hard won. [/QUOTE]

Verification