Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 5726249" data-attributes="member: 177">Fair answer.  The PCs were not there to contest the death of the Mayor, so we don't get to debate that fact.The PCs were not present to contest the planning of the escape either.  But, apparently we debate whether it was done properly?That is inconsistent.  The planning is not any more subjective than the murder.I'll give you an alternative:  The killing of the mayor, and the planning of the escape, are all history.  Unless your game includes extensive time travel, the players don't get to contest history that the PCs didn't experience.The execution of escape, however, is ongoing, in the game's present.  That is a different kettle of fish.  The PCs can act in the present, and alter the future, while the past is immutable.As for rationale - that becomes much easier when you view it this way.  The NPC planned an escape.  I ask you all, how often does travel go exactly according to plan?  Current events (say, a mule-cart upturned in the middle of the street, or slipping and falling on night-slops just dropped from a window, or whatnot) can lead to the NPC not acting exactly according to plan.  The GM is now instead rolling to see if the PC has a route that is better in the practice of the moment, instead of better in theory.  And, isn't that what we use dice for?  In theory, the fighter knows how to swing a sword very well.  In theory, he'll always hit.  In practice, he might miss - and we use the dice to check the practice, not the theory!The PCs and the NPC are in a contest to see who reaches point B soonest.  The NPC has a head start and a plan, so he gets a bonus on his roll.  But maybe the PCs can think of some things that'll get them bonuses on their roll, or maybe they'll just roll really well!  Considered that way, allowing the PCs to try makes a whole lot more sense, and we avoid the hairy (and perhaps pedantic) determination of what kind of "fact" we are dealing with.</blockquote>

Verification