Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hcm" data-source="post: 4204139" data-attributes="member: 61250">But it's not much of a game if you can't choose between easy, moderate and hard checks, imo. From the excerpt, it seems that DCs are hidden -- otherwise the players would know intimidate had no chance of success. It seems that all the player does is choose a skill, roll and then ask the DM 'do I succeed?', which is the equivalent of 'I attack with &lt;weapon&gt;, do I hit the dude?' followed by 'did we win the challenge?/get the dude's hp down to zero?'. I hope I'm wrong, but this looks like the same kind of boring design that 4e is meant to move away from.If I'm right, I'll houserule so that the player can say: 'I choose a hard history check. This is why history applies to the situation, and this is why the check should be considered hard'. (And the DM can approve, deny, help out, listen to more arguments from other players etc.) This is still not a super interesting dice game, but it's better than what the excerpt suggests, because it gives the player an actual tactical choice, besides providing the same challenge/support to creative RP. The only problem I can see with such an approach is that it makes immersion potentially harder. But if I wanted deep immersion I wouldn't play DnD anyway.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hcm, post: 4204139, member: 61250"] But it's not much of a game if you can't choose between easy, moderate and hard checks, imo. From the excerpt, it seems that DCs are hidden -- otherwise the players would know intimidate had no chance of success. It seems that all the player does is choose a skill, roll and then ask the DM 'do I succeed?', which is the equivalent of 'I attack with <weapon>, do I hit the dude?' followed by 'did we win the challenge?/get the dude's hp down to zero?'. I hope I'm wrong, but this looks like the same kind of boring design that 4e is meant to move away from. If I'm right, I'll houserule so that the player can say: 'I choose a hard history check. This is why history applies to the situation, and this is why the check should be considered hard'. (And the DM can approve, deny, help out, listen to more arguments from other players etc.) This is still not a super interesting dice game, but it's better than what the excerpt suggests, because it gives the player an actual tactical choice, besides providing the same challenge/support to creative RP. The only problem I can see with such an approach is that it makes immersion potentially harder. But if I wanted deep immersion I wouldn't play DnD anyway. [/QUOTE]

Verification