Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 7349592" data-attributes="member: 48965">I never made the claim antagonists always come into play but unless you are claiming that they never do in a SC... I'm not sure how this addresses my stated issue?   So wait there's no uncertainty in an easy DC? An easy DC in 5e is 10, a character with an average score with no training has a 45% chance of failing that irregardless of level... even a trained 20th level character with no ability modifier bonus has a 15% chance of failing an easy check.  In other words, even presupposing a mid to high level party...Wouldn't your above assumptions depend on who is making the check (trained vs. untrained/high ability score vs. low ability score/expertise vs. non-expertise), especially with bounded accuracy involved?  So I don't think you can dismiss the situation with the party, for the most part, succeeding just because the party is high level... I don't think the assumptions you are making here are necessarily correct.Not sure how this apples to oranges comparison applies.  In other words me designating the hit points or number of opponents does not in and of itself place limiters on how the PC's must deal with said opponent... whereas if I say the encounter must last X rounds (irregardless of what the PC's do) and they must eliminate Y hit points before it ends (eliminating such actions as running away or negotiating, etc. that could end the encounter before the prerequisite hit points are loss)... well that's a different can of worms.And I find it totally different as I don't set predetermined conditions on how the encounter must be interacted with before the encounter begins.  I don't set the number of attack rolls that must be made successfully before the interaction with the encounter is a success... there may not be a single attack roll made if negotiation, trickery or even intimidation are employed...  And again this doesn't address my issue.  The SC structure in no way enforces that the narrative must actually create a solution to the fictional challenge... only that X successes must be achieved to enter a "success" state before Y failures cause a "failure" state.Yes but I am not going to narrate actions for characters that haven't been taken to force a narrative conclusion the mechanics didn't create (Because now it really is just a series of dice rolls).  Honestly as a DM this is a pet peeve of mine, I don't narrate what my player's characters do while they just roll dice.  My players interact with the fiction and use the mechanics when there is uncertainty as to whether they can achieve the results they desire.  If I have to step in and narrate how all of these skill checks and fictional actions they've taken actually come together to provide a solution to the challenge... well then I would rather free-form individual and group checks until I and my group reach a fictional conclusion that is satisfactory to all of us.</blockquote>

Verification