Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8279146" data-attributes="member: 29398">Fair enough.  I think we more or less agree here in principle, just maybe not in specific practice........like this.  The die roll has nothing to do with what the character is theoretically capable of; instead it shows the best the character is practically capable of, right here right now in this particular situation. Further, the result is binding until and unless something materially changes in the fiction.Put another way, when a roll is called for and made, doing so commits both the player and the DM to allowing that roll to drive what comes next in the fiction.Excatly - and this bolded bit is exactly why not to allow infinite rerolls. Otherwise you're assuming they always do act to the best of their ability, or will if given long enough.It was fun trying to come up with off-the-wall ideas.  Frustrating too, but that's the point.I don't see it that way.  The lock has a DC, period.  Variances due to circumstance and-or particular approach are reflected by granting bonuses or applying penalties to the roll*, not by changes to the DC.* - yes this requires thinking outside the very limiting advantage-disadvantage box and actually applying hard plusses or minuses to the roll; no big deal to anyone from pre-5e days but a large step for those who started with 5e.Again, you're mixing up stalled story progress in the fiction with a stoppage in gameplay at the table.  These are - I repeat - not the same thing.I would.Players who can't handle a little frustration now and then aren't players I want to bother with.It'd be like saying hey, let's watch the ballgame on TV and being told no, that's boring, just watch the 30-minute highlight show later.  Sure that 30-minute highlight show has all the key moments; but clearly there was way more to the game than just those key moments, otherwise it wouldn't have taken three hours to play in real time.Now I've no idea what you want.You asked for something where the only meaningful consequence was for success, and at least one other poster gave you that.  Then you asked for something where the only meaningful consequence was for failure, and I gave you that. In each case you complained that it wasn't what you were looking for. Well, there's only four options: meaningful consequence for both, one, the other, or neither. "Neither" seems pointless. "Both" would be uncommon but it can certainly happen. And you've been given examples of the other two.</blockquote>

Verification