Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 5518057" data-attributes="member: 92305">The arbirariness is what most would object to, I agree.  That's why I said that this is good for player who really trust their GM/DM.  If they do, his arbirtrary rulings enhance the game. I always throw dice behind a screen and almost never let my players see what I've thrown.  I don't want them thinking about rules, dice, and modifiers.  I want them to hear the story I'm weaving, live through the experience via their characters, and come out of the game session feeling like they've been transported to a place rather than having played a game. The arbitrary description is part of that.    But, it's not "every time"!  It's arbitrary!  It's the DM telling a story. It's akin to the DM saying, "You notice a strange design on the goblin's shield.  You saw it before on the mage's robe."  That's the DM arbitrarily deciding that the character noticed and recognized the design, and put two-and-two together rather than making the character roll some sort of INT/WIS/Perception check to see if he noticed the design. It's very close to the same thing, except we're talking about combat rather than exploration. I usually look for "clues" in the player's description, and I watch what the dice "say".  In the example in the OP, the DM described how the NPC Caelis would attack left handed, and the player described how his right handed character would attempt to parry. It was the handedness that was my "clue" in this situation. Then, when Caelis hit and reduced Thrallan by 9 points from 11 to 2, the dice "said" that something fairly powerful happened here.  Thus, I ruled that Thrallan got his fingers cracked, gave the player a check to keep from dropping his weapon to be fair, and then moved on with what had been established. This makes combat exciting because of the arbitrariness.  In a regular game, without this aspect I'm speaking of, the character doesn't care as much that his toon was reduced to 2 HP.  My arbitrary call makes the combat so much more memorable.  "Hey, remember when Thrallan blocked a guy and got his fingers crushed, then swung his leg out and kicked the guy in the balls!  Man, what an encounter!" Regular RAW dicing back and forth does not allow this element of the unexpected--the mystery--the risk of combat.   If a player can embrace this type of thing, he just might find the game so much more fun. Embracing and trusting the DM is the hard part for many players, I think.    To the contrary, I think a combat can get steril and boring when the players are more focussed on the modifiers, flanking bonuses, and such, instead of living in the moment.  I don't want my players thinking about rules.  Heck, I don't even care if they know a lot about the rules.  I'm the DM, and I change the world as I see fit for me and my players to have a good time.  I don't want them playing like they're playing a computer game.  I want them experiencing a life in a fantasy world. As far as bogging down the game, I find that doing something like I describe peaks their interest.  "Whaaa....  I just got my fingers bruised and maybe broken!" It sure wakes them up. And, if it in some way is bogging down the game, then I will leave it out, just like I'll skip a wandering monster I might have rolled if it doesn't "fit" into what's happening in the game at the moment. Part of the DM's job is to keep the story moving, the game interesting.  I try very hard not to do things that make the game un-involving.    It's a bit high, but I give NPCs a 10% chance of being a lefty.  Reality is probably more like 6-8%.</blockquote>

Verification