Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6200507" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>I'd also point out N'raac, that your characterization that "Players must always have a chance to succeed" is completely your own fabrication. No one is saying that just because the player tries something he has to succeed.</p><p></p><p>Heck, with the chamberlain example, if I use diplomacy and roll very low, then I, as the player, have absolutely no reason to complain. I know what the mechanics say and I have no room to complain here.</p><p></p><p>Where I do draw the line though is that the DM, through fiat, simply declares that some action, which is perfectly reasonable, automatically fails and manipulates the game to ensure that's true. The Chamberlain sticks his fingers in his ears (completely immersion breaking since such an action would be very much out of character for the Chamberlain), runs away from the PC's, so they cannot use their skills (again, completely out of character and only chosen to artificially inflate the DC of the check) and so on.</p><p></p><p>If you are going to use the game, is it too much for players to ask that the mechanics actually be used? You, the DM, agreed with your players that you were going to play game X. Everyone at the table is familiar with the mechanics of game X. The only reason that you're playing silly buggers with the mechanics is because of some pre-defined outcome that you the DM have decided upon.</p><p></p><p>There are a bajillion games out there that allow the DM to do this. Most rules light games allow this explicitly. But, if I'm playing a rules heavy game, why am I now a bad player for insisting that we actually use the rules in the book?</p><p></p><p>Again, we're not talking about strawmen examples of convincing the Pope that he's an athiest. We're talking about bog standard examples that are actually illustrated in the Player's Handbook. I mean, if I cannot reasonably expect to be able to do the specific things elucidated in the rules, what can I reasonably expect at any time?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6200507, member: 22779"] I'd also point out N'raac, that your characterization that "Players must always have a chance to succeed" is completely your own fabrication. No one is saying that just because the player tries something he has to succeed. Heck, with the chamberlain example, if I use diplomacy and roll very low, then I, as the player, have absolutely no reason to complain. I know what the mechanics say and I have no room to complain here. Where I do draw the line though is that the DM, through fiat, simply declares that some action, which is perfectly reasonable, automatically fails and manipulates the game to ensure that's true. The Chamberlain sticks his fingers in his ears (completely immersion breaking since such an action would be very much out of character for the Chamberlain), runs away from the PC's, so they cannot use their skills (again, completely out of character and only chosen to artificially inflate the DC of the check) and so on. If you are going to use the game, is it too much for players to ask that the mechanics actually be used? You, the DM, agreed with your players that you were going to play game X. Everyone at the table is familiar with the mechanics of game X. The only reason that you're playing silly buggers with the mechanics is because of some pre-defined outcome that you the DM have decided upon. There are a bajillion games out there that allow the DM to do this. Most rules light games allow this explicitly. But, if I'm playing a rules heavy game, why am I now a bad player for insisting that we actually use the rules in the book? Again, we're not talking about strawmen examples of convincing the Pope that he's an athiest. We're talking about bog standard examples that are actually illustrated in the Player's Handbook. I mean, if I cannot reasonably expect to be able to do the specific things elucidated in the rules, what can I reasonably expect at any time? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
Top