Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8274779" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I don’t want the result of the roll to change the fictional scenario. In Dungeon World, the information the GM reveals after a player Spouts Lore is true, even if the GM had to make it up on the spot, so there’s always relevant information or an unfortunate truth to be revealed. That works well for that PbtA “play to find out what happens” paradigm, but it isn’t the sort of play I want out of D&D. In D&D, there might or might not be relevant information or an unfortunate truth to reveal, as that information is predetermined and static, rather than created on the spot in response to the result of the roll. So, if there isn’t relevant information or an unfortunate truth to be revealed, I wouldn’t call for a roll. I’d just tell the player something interesting their character remembers about the subject.I also kind of think that revealing an unfortunate truth would be a more appropriate result for success than failure in D&D. Because the information is true whether the players reveal it with the results of their check or not, it’s preferable to know it so you can adjust your tactics accordingly than to go on not knowing it. An unfortunate truth is therefore relevant information that could be revealed on a success, rather than a consequence of failure.</blockquote>