Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7141614" data-attributes="member: 97077">My understanding of the rules and adjudication process is that the DM judges whether the action attempted by the character succeeds or fails. If the DM isn't sure, THEN he or she sets the DC. There is no DC for a task that automatically succeeds or fails. An automatic failure isn't an un-achievable DC. It's just a failure.It's genre appropriate, sure. But it seems a bit inconsistent with what you appeared to have established about the scene. Stating in so many words that the approach of intimidation is basically off the table isn't you &quot;forcing your ideas into the game&quot; or &quot;forcing them to guess what you want them to do.&quot; It's simply framing the challenge and giving the players a heads up that they should try something else other than that one thing. There's a whole host of other things they could try.As I mentioned upthread, it reads to me as: DM says a thing is impossible. &quot;Playstyle&quot; allows for player to override by forcing an ability check. This ticks off DM. Player continues to be pushy because, hey, it works and I can always just force another ability check. DM is more ticked off, scene goes badly from there.If the &quot;playstyle&quot; didn't allow for that, there would likely have been a different outcome. Which, again, is not to say you shouldn't play how you want to play. I am a player with a group that is largely similar (and notably they have the same issues). I just don't think you're necessarily the source of the problem as you outlined in your original post.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7141614, member: 97077"] My understanding of the rules and adjudication process is that the DM judges whether the action attempted by the character succeeds or fails. If the DM isn't sure, THEN he or she sets the DC. There is no DC for a task that automatically succeeds or fails. An automatic failure isn't an un-achievable DC. It's just a failure. It's genre appropriate, sure. But it seems a bit inconsistent with what you appeared to have established about the scene. Stating in so many words that the approach of intimidation is basically off the table isn't you "forcing your ideas into the game" or "forcing them to guess what you want them to do." It's simply framing the challenge and giving the players a heads up that they should try something else other than [I]that one thing[/I]. There's a whole host of other things they could try. As I mentioned upthread, it reads to me as: DM says a thing is impossible. "Playstyle" allows for player to override by forcing an ability check. This ticks off DM. Player continues to be pushy because, hey, it works and I can always just force another ability check. DM is more ticked off, scene goes badly from there. If the "playstyle" didn't allow for that, there would likely have been a different outcome. Which, again, is not to say you shouldn't play how you want to play. I am a player with a group that is largely similar (and notably they have the same issues). I just don't think you're necessarily the source of the problem as you outlined in your original post. [/QUOTE]

Verification