Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Do you like "off screen" events to be rules-plausible?
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="BryonD" data-source="post: 4042177" data-attributes="member: 957"><p>I agree.</p><p></p><p>I think the problem is that the question is set up as an either/or scenario and, frankly, that sucks.</p><p></p><p>I am very strongly in the "rules model the physics" camp. But I am also very strongly in the "don't let the rules use you camp." But it appears I am in a minority of people who see how these need not be contradictory. </p><p></p><p>Expecting the rules to define the physics of the world does not require that every far flung unlikely event be explicitly covered. There is nothing against the rules to simply state that the precise circumstances of the king's fall made his striking the ground become in effect a save or die trap and he failed to save. And the DM can do the exact same thing to a player. If he is a good DM he will make it fun and the players will be glad it happened.</p><p></p><p>If you want you can roll 6d10 every time anyone goes more than 1/4 mile on horseback and every time it comes up all 0s you declare the trap is encountered and the character, PC or NPC, must make a ride check to not fall and, if they fall, a Fort save or die. But it makes a whole lot more sense to forget the d10s and just state that when it works for the story the horse will stumble at this point. That is no more unreasonable than simply declaring that a Troll has an ambush set at the bridge. And it is completely within the rules. There is nothing rules-implausible about it.</p><p></p><p>For the drow apocalypse scenario, I'd let the PCs potentially be able to figure out the ritual. But it may just turn out that the first step in completing the ritual is bathing in the blood of 100 virgins and then gaining the blessing of a major demon by selling your soul to it. The players are permitted to proceed. In my own game the characters would become npcs in this process, but nothing in the rules prevents the characters from doing something someone else could do. And if some other DM wanted to let the characters continue as PCs right through the end, then cool, I hope they have fun.</p><p></p><p>But everything that happens should be rules-plausible. And in D&D, that isn't hard to achieve.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 4042177, member: 957"] I agree. I think the problem is that the question is set up as an either/or scenario and, frankly, that sucks. I am very strongly in the "rules model the physics" camp. But I am also very strongly in the "don't let the rules use you camp." But it appears I am in a minority of people who see how these need not be contradictory. Expecting the rules to define the physics of the world does not require that every far flung unlikely event be explicitly covered. There is nothing against the rules to simply state that the precise circumstances of the king's fall made his striking the ground become in effect a save or die trap and he failed to save. And the DM can do the exact same thing to a player. If he is a good DM he will make it fun and the players will be glad it happened. If you want you can roll 6d10 every time anyone goes more than 1/4 mile on horseback and every time it comes up all 0s you declare the trap is encountered and the character, PC or NPC, must make a ride check to not fall and, if they fall, a Fort save or die. But it makes a whole lot more sense to forget the d10s and just state that when it works for the story the horse will stumble at this point. That is no more unreasonable than simply declaring that a Troll has an ambush set at the bridge. And it is completely within the rules. There is nothing rules-implausible about it. For the drow apocalypse scenario, I'd let the PCs potentially be able to figure out the ritual. But it may just turn out that the first step in completing the ritual is bathing in the blood of 100 virgins and then gaining the blessing of a major demon by selling your soul to it. The players are permitted to proceed. In my own game the characters would become npcs in this process, but nothing in the rules prevents the characters from doing something someone else could do. And if some other DM wanted to let the characters continue as PCs right through the end, then cool, I hope they have fun. But everything that happens should be rules-plausible. And in D&D, that isn't hard to achieve. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Do you like "off screen" events to be rules-plausible?
Top