Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House Rule Idea: Knowledge Checks Never Fail (they just might make things worse)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9275234" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>Something I'm experimenting in my FG weekly campaign at present (which is a no-myth sandbox, essentially) is a possible unworkable approach (but one I'm very curious to see if I can make work) that goes like this</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>success </strong>= player gets a random prompt relating to their area of enquiry and working from that they say what's true <strong>OR </strong>they force GM to disclose a mystery</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>failure </strong>= GM creates a "mystery" related to the enquiry, which is the only way hidden information gets created (players accordingly know that the mystery exists, just not its contents or what it relates to)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>Established facts are simply disclosed, so there's no check needed. And facts that haven't been established are whatever whoever succeeds with the enquiry makes them. Consequently as GM, I have two jobs. One is to use the newly established facts to compel/constrain what I say. (Players have to do that, too, but their focus is their characters.) The other is to devise mysteries that - without contradicting anything known to be true - sets stuff up, twists things, and so on.</p><p></p><p>A simple example might be if players were enquiring about how an arcane device works. Success = they say how it works based on a prompt. Prompts are framed as questions, so they might be answering what its effect is, rather than how to activate it. Etc. Failure = I create a mystery related to the device. Options could include a glitch or curse, a keyword needed to activate it, someone hunting for it.</p><p></p><p>I've concerns around the usual conflicts of interest when deciding something that benefits/harms oneself. So far, it's led to a pyramid found in a desert turning out to contain dreadful high elven arcanists experimenting on draining life force from mortal folk. I was surprised by that one, but it flowed well from the situation and prompts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9275234, member: 71699"] Something I'm experimenting in my FG weekly campaign at present (which is a no-myth sandbox, essentially) is a possible unworkable approach (but one I'm very curious to see if I can make work) that goes like this [INDENT][B]success [/B]= player gets a random prompt relating to their area of enquiry and working from that they say what's true [B]OR [/B]they force GM to disclose a mystery [B]failure [/B]= GM creates a "mystery" related to the enquiry, which is the only way hidden information gets created (players accordingly know that the mystery exists, just not its contents or what it relates to) [/INDENT] Established facts are simply disclosed, so there's no check needed. And facts that haven't been established are whatever whoever succeeds with the enquiry makes them. Consequently as GM, I have two jobs. One is to use the newly established facts to compel/constrain what I say. (Players have to do that, too, but their focus is their characters.) The other is to devise mysteries that - without contradicting anything known to be true - sets stuff up, twists things, and so on. A simple example might be if players were enquiring about how an arcane device works. Success = they say how it works based on a prompt. Prompts are framed as questions, so they might be answering what its effect is, rather than how to activate it. Etc. Failure = I create a mystery related to the device. Options could include a glitch or curse, a keyword needed to activate it, someone hunting for it. I've concerns around the usual conflicts of interest when deciding something that benefits/harms oneself. So far, it's led to a pyramid found in a desert turning out to contain dreadful high elven arcanists experimenting on draining life force from mortal folk. I was surprised by that one, but it flowed well from the situation and prompts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House Rule Idea: Knowledge Checks Never Fail (they just might make things worse)
Top