Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9629256" data-attributes="member: 6785785">No, we can discuss it in concrete terms of play. In Stonetop, for example, if a player said that the character was looking for a clue somewhere, they’d roll +Wis (2d6 plus their Wisdom score, typically between -1 and +3). On a 10+ they’d get to ask 3 questions from the Seek Insight list. On a 7-9, they’d get to ask 1. On a 6-, the GM makes a move. Very clear procedure that can be described without the specifics of the fiction. It seems to me that most of the trad proponents in this thread are very reluctant to talk about what actually happens at the table. Because so much of it is “the GM decides” and the more they say that, the more it makes them realize how much they’re controlling the game. You said the players could create a clue. Now you’re acknowledging that the clues come from the DM. The players can prompt the DM with questions, but it’s largely up to the DM if the question results in a clue. And the quality of the clue. And how that clue propels the PCs. As I said… the GM has a massive amount of influence here. So the NPCs are limited by the DM in this way? So some kind of master thief would miss an obvious obstacle like cameras because the DM didn’t think of it? Well, without resorting to house rules or ad hoc rulings, I’d think that having the NPC making some kind of skill check would make sense. Like a Stealth check. If I was running a mystery scenario with a system like this, when the player asked about the cameras, I’d make a check for the NPC, and then narrate accordingly. I was comparing the amount of GM Fiat in the mystery scenario to the amount of GM Fiat in the resolution of the Alarm spell from the OP.</blockquote>

Verification