Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9620322" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I think it's a tricky example to look at. I think the first options is certainly more clear and player facing. And assuming good faith on the GM's part in the second option, they have equal chances of success or failure, so they're not meaningfully different in any way other than the hidden roll element. This is also a case of GM fiat feeding into the resolution rather than it being used to decide the outcome. Like, in this scenario I'm assuming the GM has decided that there's a chance the mind flayer is going to eat the character's brain, but it's a slim chance. So he's created some way to determine that. That's not an issue. What's an issue (assuming this matters to the participants) is if the GM just decides the mind flayer eats his brain. No mechanics are used, it's just the GM deciding what happens. However... I say all of that with the caveat that the larger picture really matters here. How did the PC wind up imprisoned by the mind flayer? All of this may be the consequences of an attempt to kill the mind flayer that failed... in which case, I think in many games, it would be fine for the character to die. Did the player go into this situation understanding the risks and the potential consequences and so on. Examining just this specific point without the situation that led to it is tricky.</blockquote>