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
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7597778" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>The description of the environment was simply that the building is decrepit.</p><p></p><p>How is "judging" whether or not the GM will decide that the chandelier in a decrepit house might fall if leapt on any different from <em>guessing</em> that same thing?</p><p></p><p>And if the answer is that the possiblity is implict in the situation and the player's knowledge of the GM's taste and table practices, then it no longer serves an example of the consequences not being known to the player! Which is what it was presented as (by [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION]).</p><p></p><p>So it's "coddling" to tell it to the players, but it's not "coddling" to wink it to them (by way of <em>descriptions of the environment so far, the general tone of the campaign, and their basic understanding of the world</em>)? That's not a contrast I find easy to follow. Particularly in the context of interpreting a poster who was making a big deal of <em>not</em> telegraphing traps.</p><p></p><p>Let's look at it another way:</p><p></p><p>The player knows chandeliers, in general, may fall under human weight. The player also knows (because the GM said so) that this building is run down. That increases the prospect that the chandelier might fall when leapt on.</p><p></p><p>The player, knowing all this, declares that his/her PC wants to leap onto the chandelier and swing across the room to pursue the assassin. The GM calls for a check, which gives rise to a chance of failure.</p><p></p><p><em>How is it coddling the player to tell them that, on a failed check, they will bring down the chandelier?</em> What advantage is being ceded? The player already is uncertain as to the outcome of the action, because the check is required. What additional challenge is created by keeping the player uncertain as to what the GM thinks the result of failure should be? It's just adding more guessing on top of an already uncertain resolution process. I don't see that it makes things any harder (less coddled) for the player.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7597778, member: 42582"] The description of the environment was simply that the building is decrepit. How is "judging" whether or not the GM will decide that the chandelier in a decrepit house might fall if leapt on any different from [I]guessing[/I] that same thing? And if the answer is that the possiblity is implict in the situation and the player's knowledge of the GM's taste and table practices, then it no longer serves an example of the consequences not being known to the player! Which is what it was presented as (by [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION]). So it's "coddling" to tell it to the players, but it's not "coddling" to wink it to them (by way of [i]descriptions of the environment so far, the general tone of the campaign, and their basic understanding of the world[/i])? That's not a contrast I find easy to follow. Particularly in the context of interpreting a poster who was making a big deal of [I]not[/I] telegraphing traps. Let's look at it another way: The player knows chandeliers, in general, may fall under human weight. The player also knows (because the GM said so) that this building is run down. That increases the prospect that the chandelier might fall when leapt on. The player, knowing all this, declares that his/her PC wants to leap onto the chandelier and swing across the room to pursue the assassin. The GM calls for a check, which gives rise to a chance of failure. [I]How is it coddling the player to tell them that, on a failed check, they will bring down the chandelier?[/I] What advantage is being ceded? The player already is uncertain as to the outcome of the action, because the check is required. What additional challenge is created by keeping the player uncertain as to what the GM thinks the result of failure should be? It's just adding more guessing on top of an already uncertain resolution process. I don't see that it makes things any harder (less coddled) for the player. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
Top