Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 9053665" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I still think people just have a different degrees of what reasonable specificity means. In all my years of playing with dozens of DMs, outside of a conversation here and there, I don't remember when something like &quot;I smash the vase&quot; would not have been adequate.I had a game yesterday where there was an office to search.&nbsp; I just described the office in general detail and then had people go through it, a combination of perception and investigation checks.&nbsp; There was, indeed a drawer with a false bottom someone noticed with a perception check.&nbsp; Before the PC tried to open it they called over the rogue and had them do an investigation - which indeed the false bottom was trapped.&nbsp; We just did a bit of a cut-scene and I mostly narrated what the trap was and the PC rolled to disable device.At no time was anyone confused, felt like they were being left out or not in control of their character, everyone was having a lot of fun with it.&nbsp; In another scene they were chasing after a mysterious character and had to run through a carnival, I described the obstacles that were getting in the way and gave them options on how to go through and let them suggest alternatives.&nbsp; Again ... a mix of my narrating and players declaring things like &quot;Athletics to barrel through?&quot; was adequate.My point is that we all had fun with the narration on both sides of things, occasionally we went into specifics when it mattered, there was never any &quot;confusion&quot; to be avoided.It's fine if that style of running this stuff isn't for you.&nbsp; But making excuses for why your style works for you - such as needing that level of detail to determine whether or not the narration is &quot;accurate&quot; - doesn't mean anything other than you happen to like it.&nbsp; I don't need it, my players don't need it, it has never once caused a problem other than the incredibly rare correction that I assume happens with any style.&nbsp; The type of correction that I can't remember hitting for literally years.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 9053665, member: 6801845"] I still think people just have a different degrees of what reasonable specificity means. In all my years of playing with dozens of DMs, outside of a conversation here and there, I don't remember when something like "I smash the vase" would not have been adequate. I had a game yesterday where there was an office to search. I just described the office in general detail and then had people go through it, a combination of perception and investigation checks. There was, indeed a drawer with a false bottom someone noticed with a perception check. Before the PC tried to open it they called over the rogue and had them do an investigation - which indeed the false bottom was trapped. We just did a bit of a cut-scene and I mostly narrated what the trap was and the PC rolled to disable device. At no time was anyone confused, felt like they were being left out or not in control of their character, everyone was having a lot of fun with it. In another scene they were chasing after a mysterious character and had to run through a carnival, I described the obstacles that were getting in the way and gave them options on how to go through and let them suggest alternatives. Again ... a mix of my narrating and players declaring things like "Athletics to barrel through?" was adequate. My point is that we all had fun with the narration on both sides of things, occasionally we went into specifics when it mattered, there was never any "confusion" to be avoided. It's fine if that style of running this stuff isn't for you. But making excuses for why your style works for you - such as needing that level of detail to determine whether or not the narration is "accurate" - doesn't mean anything other than you happen to like it. I don't need it, my players don't need it, it has never once caused a problem other than the incredibly rare correction that I assume happens with any style. The type of correction that I can't remember hitting for literally years. [/QUOTE]

Verification