Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6783777" data-attributes="member: 97077">I value outcomes always being interesting (even if it sucks for the characters) because it's a game we're playing and I find that uninteresting things is not a good use of my free time. Thus I endeavor to maximize interesting things occurring during the game. I strive to make sure they are plausible too and follow the fiction.As it appears there is no convincing you, will you indulge me with a couple of questions as an aside? I find there is often a correlation between rejecting particular approaches and embracing others. I'm curious if that's the case here.1. Do you tend to ask for a lot of checks in your game? In other words, if something a player says sounds like it could be a "skill check," do you ask for it? Or do you consider whether a check is required given the fictional situation?2. Do you ever make rolls for the players to try and minimize the chances of them "metagaming" by seeing a low die result and hearing a questionable narration by the DM then asking to repeat the task? If you don't do this, do you employ a kludge such as not allowing retries?Edit: 3. Do your players ask to make "skill checks" in your game?4. Which is the game you play the most?</blockquote>