Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7789412" data-attributes="member: 16814">Sorry for the snip, but this one line really calls out a big deviation in thinking.&nbsp; 5e is its own game, and doesn't care what or how things were done in the last two editions.&nbsp; I don't care how you chose to play except that I sincerely hope it's in a way that's fun and engaging for you.&nbsp; Really, I do.&nbsp; 5e, though, isn't the last editions and playing it in the style of previous editions will lead to some things being odd, or some conversations about the game being odd.&nbsp; I think it's very much worth it to understand the game as it is written, even if you chose to do something else entirely with your own play.I differ a bit in how I apply knowledge skills and how social skills work in my game.&nbsp; This difference is that I dislike the odd passive nature of some of the descriptions of use in the game so I've made them all active skills that directly act against the fiction in game.&nbsp; Insight is the skill used to elicit information from someone.&nbsp; Persuasion is the skill used to convince.&nbsp; Deception is the skill used to hide information or convincing present false information.&nbsp; Intimidate is, well, intimidation.&nbsp; All actively work on the fiction to change it, none treat with what PCs think.&nbsp; Similarly, history, arcana, religion, etc., all actively work on the fiction and aren't used to recall lore passively.&nbsp; You might type a demon by using arcana, but it's going to be by studying the taxonomy of this demon and using that to determine the information, not checking to see if you remember something.&nbsp; Usually, though, arcana is being used to directly manipulate magic in game, by thwarting rituals or bypassing magical traps or applying a bit of loose magic to empower a portal.&nbsp; History is used to actively solve puzzles of what happened in the past -- think field researcher doing a dig, only faster and more cinematic.&nbsp; I've had a player use History to find a secret door by considering their knowledge of the time period, the architectural style, and the politics of the time to anticipate that a secret passage out of a room should be there and that this kind of mechanism was commonly used.&nbsp; Boom.So, to your larger point, no, &quot;I make an Insight check&quot; or &quot;I make a Perception check&quot; is too vague to adjudicate without me making assumptions about what the player is trying to do.&nbsp; Yes, sometimes it's easy to do so, but sometimes it isn't.&nbsp; I'm consistent so that my players never ever have that &quot;wait, he's clarifying, something's up&quot; moment and because it's just good practice. Surely you aren't claiming that a consistent level of clarity in communications is somehow a bad things in games?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7789412, member: 16814"] Sorry for the snip, but this one line really calls out a big deviation in thinking. 5e is its own game, and doesn't care what or how things were done in the last two editions. I don't care how you chose to play except that I sincerely hope it's in a way that's fun and engaging for you. Really, I do. 5e, though, isn't the last editions and playing it in the style of previous editions will lead to some things being odd, or some conversations about the game being odd. I think it's very much worth it to understand the game as it is written, even if you chose to do something else entirely with your own play. I differ a bit in how I apply knowledge skills and how social skills work in my game. This difference is that I dislike the odd passive nature of some of the descriptions of use in the game so I've made them all active skills that directly act against the fiction in game. Insight is the skill used to elicit information from someone. Persuasion is the skill used to convince. Deception is the skill used to hide information or convincing present false information. Intimidate is, well, intimidation. All actively work on the fiction to change it, none treat with what PCs think. Similarly, history, arcana, religion, etc., all actively work on the fiction and aren't used to recall lore passively. You might type a demon by using arcana, but it's going to be by studying the taxonomy of this demon and using that to determine the information, not checking to see if you remember something. Usually, though, arcana is being used to directly manipulate magic in game, by thwarting rituals or bypassing magical traps or applying a bit of loose magic to empower a portal. History is used to actively solve puzzles of what happened in the past -- think field researcher doing a dig, only faster and more cinematic. I've had a player use History to find a secret door by considering their knowledge of the time period, the architectural style, and the politics of the time to anticipate that a secret passage out of a room should be there and that this kind of mechanism was commonly used. Boom. So, to your larger point, no, "I make an Insight check" or "I make a Perception check" is too vague to adjudicate without me making assumptions about what the player is trying to do. Yes, sometimes it's easy to do so, but sometimes it isn't. I'm consistent so that my players never ever have that "wait, he's clarifying, something's up" moment and because it's just good practice. Surely you aren't claiming that a consistent level of clarity in communications is somehow a bad things in games? [/QUOTE]

Verification