Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7141763" data-attributes="member: 22779">Yeah, I tend heavily towards that &quot;Roll With It&quot; end of the spectrum.&nbsp; ((BTW, thanks for pointing out the page, interesting read - I think I read it before, but, just refreshed my memory just now))&nbsp; Personally, I prefer the consistency of it over the middle path and I don't play D&amp;D if I'm going to &quot;Ignore the Dice&quot;.&nbsp; The disadvantage, in my mind, with the Middle Path method is that it can lead to inconsistency.The player can roll the dice to intimidate this NPC, but, not that NPC and the only difference between them is whatever I decide as the DM.&nbsp; And, as a player, I find this inconsistency extremely frustrating.&nbsp; For me, it makes the DM far too intrusive.&nbsp; I'd much prefer to let the direct the action, rather than trying to play guessing games with the DM.&nbsp; Is he going to let me roll this time?&nbsp; How about next time?&nbsp; I'm not really eloquent today because work has been beating the crap out of me, guess I won't bother trying any social skills today... that sort of thing.&nbsp; Yes, I'm exaggerating.&nbsp; I know that.&nbsp; But, I've run into far too many bad, and extremely frustrating, situations if I go down that road.&nbsp; Dice cannot be argued with, for good or bad.&nbsp; Had the PC rolled poorly on the intimidate check, then, well, he fails and they don't get to go in.&nbsp; He rolled well, so, now the dice are dictating that the story says that they gained entry.&nbsp; I prefer the objectivity of the die roll.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7141763, member: 22779"] Yeah, I tend heavily towards that "Roll With It" end of the spectrum. ((BTW, thanks for pointing out the page, interesting read - I think I read it before, but, just refreshed my memory just now)) Personally, I prefer the consistency of it over the middle path and I don't play D&D if I'm going to "Ignore the Dice". The disadvantage, in my mind, with the Middle Path method is that it can lead to inconsistency. The player can roll the dice to intimidate [I]this [/I] NPC, but, not [I]that [/I] NPC and the only difference between them is whatever I decide as the DM. And, as a player, I find this inconsistency extremely frustrating. For me, it makes the DM far too intrusive. I'd much prefer to let the direct the action, rather than trying to play guessing games with the DM. Is he going to let me roll this time? How about next time? I'm not really eloquent today because work has been beating the crap out of me, guess I won't bother trying any social skills today... that sort of thing. Yes, I'm exaggerating. I know that. But, I've run into far too many bad, and extremely frustrating, situations if I go down that road. Dice cannot be argued with, for good or bad. Had the PC rolled poorly on the intimidate check, then, well, he fails and they don't get to go in. He rolled well, so, now the dice are dictating that the story says that they gained entry. I prefer the objectivity of the die roll. [/QUOTE]

Verification