Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6210154" data-attributes="member: 87792">Various  reasons including the nature of the things burning, the width of the  corridor, the way the fire was set, the fuel, the ventilation, and much  more.  The DM ultimately is going to set the damage of the fire - and  what matters is that it must feel right.  A magnesium fire or a fire in a  small cramped space would do more damage.Of course.  And this is why we have DMs.   Because otherwise the answer is to lock down the game so that all fires  do, for instance <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/environment.htm" target="_blank">1d6  damage per round until a successful saving throw</a> whether they just  had their cloak caught lightly in the open air or were set on fire with  napalm and locked in a small box with air holes - there is no  mechanical difference by the rules between those types of fire.There are three basic options.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Giving the DM guidelines to estimate how effective things like fires are - but estimations will vary</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Making all fires identical no matter what makes them up</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A twenty page treatise on the effect of various fires on people.</li> </ul>Me, I consider the first choice vastly superior.Burning  hands can set flammable things ablaze.  Spells that create zones of  fire can set solid rock ablaze until they burn out.  There's no stepping  on toes here.Oh FFS.  This is one thing you consistently don't get.  The rules are meant to model the fiction - but the fiction comes first.  And the example was pretty clearly assuming default fantasy settings.Innocent until proven guilty.  If the Paladin of Bahamut doesn't know they are devil worshippers then yes, definitely.Bwuh?Bwuh?  There is no such thing as "a tenet of all indie  play" - one of the purposes of Indie games is to see what works  (although there are general patterns).  But in most indie RPGs a  complete success is a success at what the PC set out to do.  If  the PC set out to pants the king in full view of the Royal Court and  gets a complete success then the PC succeeds at pantsing the king in  full view of the Royal Court.  Now the consequences of successfully pantsing the king in full view of the Royal Court should be ... appropriate.Note that I say a complete success because a lot of Indie  games have successes with consequences built into the resolution  mechanics (most notably the Apocalypse World family - but also the  Cortex Plus family, Dogs in the Vineyard, Fiasco, and many more).   Indeed one of the huge advantages of Skill Challenges for evaluating  reckless PC plans when compared to the more traditional binary pass/fail  models is that there are natural points for consequences along the way -  the points at which the skill challenges are failed.  So you don't have  to have the DM look for awkward consequences - they come up in the  resolution mechanics. You know you could actually sit down and read <a href="http://www.evilhat.com/home/fate-core/" target="_blank">Fate Core</a>.  It's fairly short and written in large type. And  here, I would say that if Indie games can be said to have an actual  tenet it's "Measure what you value or you end up valuing what you  measure".  If what isn't on the character sheet is more important than what is then you have a problem with your character sheet.The  reason that Dogs in the Vineyard has the character sheet it does is  that Dogs is a game about what drives you forward, what you will back  down from, and what consequences you are willing to take.  So that is  what is on the character sheet.  The elements of the world that  contribute to that ... don't make it to the character sheet.  If your  character sheet is all about how you do in combat (as the AD&D  fighter one is) you'll expect to run into grunt combat and that the  game's about that. Monte  Haul is a complaint about a problem that hasn't really been relevant  for about thirty years.  For the rolling multi-DMs campaign it's an  issue.  The rest of the time, not so much.And can we use a <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm#angelSolar" target="_blank">Solar</a> <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/simulacrum.htm" target="_blank">Simulacrum</a> (which keeps its spell like abilities according to most interpretations) instead of a planar bound Glabrezu please?My normal way: The PCs say what they are doing - I tell them what to roll.Most skill challenges as used ignore the 4e DMG for very good reason.</blockquote>

Verification