Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6784724" data-attributes="member: 97077">If your character is not known for his fumbling fingers or to be an "incompetent butterfingers," as you say, then it may not follow from the fiction that you drop your divining rod and thus would not be a good choice of narration for the GM. You're arguing against something nobody is stating even though you seem to understand that the GM's narration must follow from the fiction (bolded in your quote).The consequences are a part of the stakes which are set prior to the check and based on the fiction up to that point. No agency is lost here. You are still acting freely and impacting the fictional world by your action. I explained this clearly upthread. If you are moving around searching for a trap and you fail the appropriate check, then it is reasonable that you step on a pressure plate. (You found the trap, but...") If your stated goal and approach clearly did not include moving about to search, then stepping on the pressure plate after a failed check would not follow in the fiction and would be thus unreasonable.It's not railroading or "railroady" by any definition of the term as I understand it.Depending on the goals of play of the game being played, perhaps you should be - and what the players find fun and interesting, too. Or what contributes to the creation of an exciting, memorable story. Or whatever.If you don't know, you can ask. As I've mentioned, offering the stakes prior to the roll makes sure everyone is on the same page and allows for the occasional renegotiation from a player such as in the case of:Whereupon you could say, "Sure, that's sounds good. Roll for it."</blockquote>

Verification