Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7790640">I like to differentiate between genuine domain expertise, and basic creativity.&nbsp; Certainly expecting players to know chemical formulae, or understand how a clock escapement works, or to know vocabulary from a foreign language (let alone a fictional foreign language) would be leaning too heavily on &quot;player skill.&quot;None of the examples I gave require a player to have any specific out-of-game expertise.&nbsp; It just requires following along with the plot, and being willing to think and improvise ideas.Sure, you could excise all player judgment from the game.&nbsp; Why not eliminate spell descriptions, and just have a &quot;Cast Spell&quot; action, with the results appropriate to the need?&nbsp; After all, you can't expect players to be actual wizards.&nbsp; &quot;I want to cast a spell that will do fire damage to all of them, but miss my friends, can I do that?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Let's see, that's three criteria, so a DC of 18 for Arcana.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Drat, 15.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Nope, you didn't prepare a spell like that.&quot;Same with tactical movement.&nbsp; Get rid of grid and positioning and distance, and just give players a Combat skill they can check every time there's uncertainty.&nbsp; &quot;Can I get to the Wizard without drawing opportunity attacks?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Gimme a Combat check.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;17.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Yes, you can.&quot;That doesn't sound very fun to me, and it's not very fun to me when &quot;detecting traps&quot; and &quot;detecting lies&quot; are reduced to a single binary die roll.&nbsp; It adds nothing to the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7790640"] I like to differentiate between genuine domain expertise, and basic creativity. Certainly expecting players to know chemical formulae, or understand how a clock escapement works, or to know vocabulary from a foreign language (let alone a fictional foreign language) would be leaning too heavily on "player skill." None of the examples I gave require a player to have any specific out-of-game expertise. It just requires following along with the plot, and being willing to think and improvise ideas. Sure, you could excise all player judgment from the game. Why not eliminate spell descriptions, and just have a "Cast Spell" action, with the results appropriate to the need? After all, you can't expect players to be actual wizards. "I want to cast a spell that will do fire damage to all of them, but miss my friends, can I do that?" "Let's see, that's three criteria, so a DC of 18 for Arcana." "Drat, 15." "Nope, you didn't prepare a spell like that." Same with tactical movement. Get rid of grid and positioning and distance, and just give players a Combat skill they can check every time there's uncertainty. "Can I get to the Wizard without drawing opportunity attacks?" "Gimme a Combat check." "17." "Yes, you can." That doesn't sound very fun to me, and it's not very fun to me when "detecting traps" and "detecting lies" are reduced to a single binary die roll. It adds nothing to the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification