Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8280442" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I don’t know what to tell you. I have no idea what part of “narrate success if there’s no consequence for failure” you’re struggling to understand looks like in actual play. I’ve given several examples throughout this conversation. If you have specific questions I can try and answer them.Sure. For any given finite timeframe, it is possible that you might not succeed at a given task during that timeframe. Does that make telling a player they can’t open a lock over the course of 6 months because they failed one Dexterity check good gameplay? I don’t think so.Then there should never be a task that’s without cost or consequence. What’s preventing you from taking infinite time to do it? Whatever your answer is, that’s the cost or consequence that should be experienced if a character fails on a check when they’ve committed to keep at the task until they succeed. If that seems stupid (e.g. “on a success you open the lock. On a failure you die of old age first”), that’s probably a task you should narrate success on without calling for a check.I don’t know how it could possibly be unclear - from my perspective they and I approach task resolution in ways that are absolute polar opposites. You’re going to have to help me understand what you find unclear about it because I can’t imagine how they could look even remotely similar.What were you indicating then?EDIT: Saw you edit. Gotcha. I appreciate the attempt to help lend clarity to the argument, but I’m not sure an explanation of how you run the game will do much to clarify a discussion between Lanefan and I about how we each run it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 8280442, member: 6779196"] I don’t know what to tell you. I have no idea what part of “narrate success if there’s no consequence for failure” you’re struggling to understand looks like in actual play. I’ve given several examples throughout this conversation. If you have specific questions I can try and answer them. Sure. For any given finite timeframe, it is possible that you might not succeed at a given task during that timeframe. Does that make telling a player they can’t open a lock over the course of 6 months because they failed one Dexterity check good gameplay? I don’t think so. Then there should never be a task that’s without cost or consequence. What’s preventing you from taking infinite time to do it? Whatever your answer is, that’s the cost or consequence that should be experienced if a character fails on a check when they’ve committed to keep at the task until they succeed. If that seems stupid (e.g. “on a success you open the lock. On a failure you die of old age first”), that’s probably a task you should narrate success on without calling for a check. I don’t know how it could possibly be unclear - from my perspective they and I approach task resolution in ways that are absolute polar opposites. You’re going to have to help me understand what you find unclear about it because I can’t imagine how they could look even remotely similar. What were you indicating then? EDIT: Saw you edit. Gotcha. I appreciate the attempt to help lend clarity to the argument, but I’m not sure an explanation of how you run the game will do much to clarify a discussion between Lanefan and I about how we each run it. [/QUOTE]

Verification