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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Old Fezziwig" data-source="post: 9522557" data-attributes="member: 59">That's fair, though there has been some agreement on the milieu (by whom or how is unclear), based on [USER=467]@Reynard[/USER]'s <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/gming-what-if-we-say-yes-to-everything.708082/post-9522240" target="_blank">post 209</a>. But what you're getting at is kind of why I'm skeptical this would lead to any great changes in how things play out, except being more agreeable. I might be making too many assumptions, but the division of authority that's been proposed, at least as I'm understanding it, seems like it's basically the same division of authority that D&D as written assumes.I'm not terrifically familiar with the current edition of D&D (one campaign, nearly a decade ago, ended in a TPK, same group as the 4e games that ended in TPKs that I've mentioned before — come to think of it, there's a pattern here), so I looked at the SRD, <a href="https://5e.d20srd.org/srd/skills/abilityChecks.htm#abilityChecks" target="_blank">which says that</a> the GM calls for an ability check or a skill check when a character attempts an action that has a chance of failure. It does seem like the cheese-and-rat gambit has some chance of failure (maybe it's a clever rat? maybe it's not hungry? maybe the rat doesn't like gruyere? do giant rats like cheese preferentially or do they like to eat people?*), so there should be a roll here. Which is a long way of saying that I think, as framed, the GM decides. How the GM decides is unclear to me, hence my sense that this is business as usual. * My understanding is that neither rats nor mice particularly like cheese anyhow, but perhaps this has been agreed upon previously somehow.</blockquote>

Verification