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
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fixing the Fighter
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="Obryn" data-source="post: 6068340" data-attributes="member: 11821"><p>There's an entire thread here full of examples of what I'm talking about. You can use some of the Book of Nine Swords maneuvers as some examples, if you wish, but barring flame cyclones, etc. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It sounds to me like you're trying to be dismissive and snide, again, rather than actually bothering to form coherent arguments.</p><p></p><p>There are two layers here - the one I'm talking about is the "fiat" layer. These are things your character can do, with known and set effects, regardless of the DM's approval. This is something like, "I hit it with my sword," or "I cast Fireball." The methods of causing these events to happen and the results of them are basically set, and managed by the rules of the game. If you say, "I cast Fireball," there's minimal interpretation necessary - you have the spell prepared, you cast it, a ball of fire explodes where you're pointing. You the player know your character is capable of doing these things because that's what they're good at. The default assumption is that these things happen.</p><p></p><p>The second layer is a more narrative interplay between players and DM where the player suggests actions and the DM interprets how best to assign difficulties, effects, results, etc. The player has minimal fiat here beyond, "I am trying to..." There is no default assumption here as to what happens, and the chances of success might be unknown; it's based mostly on the DM's interpretations of the rules, the situation, etc.</p><p></p><p><em>Nobody is suggesting that this second, more traditional layer needs to go or has no place in D&D.</em> I'm suggesting that the fiat layer needs work; my suggestion is to improve martial characters' fiat, but I'm likewise pretty okay with reducing spellcasters' fiat.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Good. Neither do I. I also don't want their sole job to be carving through HP tofu.</p><p></p><p>-O</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Obryn, post: 6068340, member: 11821"] There's an entire thread here full of examples of what I'm talking about. You can use some of the Book of Nine Swords maneuvers as some examples, if you wish, but barring flame cyclones, etc. It sounds to me like you're trying to be dismissive and snide, again, rather than actually bothering to form coherent arguments. There are two layers here - the one I'm talking about is the "fiat" layer. These are things your character can do, with known and set effects, regardless of the DM's approval. This is something like, "I hit it with my sword," or "I cast Fireball." The methods of causing these events to happen and the results of them are basically set, and managed by the rules of the game. If you say, "I cast Fireball," there's minimal interpretation necessary - you have the spell prepared, you cast it, a ball of fire explodes where you're pointing. You the player know your character is capable of doing these things because that's what they're good at. The default assumption is that these things happen. The second layer is a more narrative interplay between players and DM where the player suggests actions and the DM interprets how best to assign difficulties, effects, results, etc. The player has minimal fiat here beyond, "I am trying to..." There is no default assumption here as to what happens, and the chances of success might be unknown; it's based mostly on the DM's interpretations of the rules, the situation, etc. [I]Nobody is suggesting that this second, more traditional layer needs to go or has no place in D&D.[/I] I'm suggesting that the fiat layer needs work; my suggestion is to improve martial characters' fiat, but I'm likewise pretty okay with reducing spellcasters' fiat. Good. Neither do I. I also don't want their sole job to be carving through HP tofu. -O [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fixing the Fighter
Top