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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I'm *GASP* Actually Going to Be Playing 5e in a Few Weeks -- What are the Character Creation Pitfalls to Avoid?
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: 6885849" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't think there's a passage in the 5e books that says that, for a spell to take effect, the GM must agree that it does. Whereas there is this passage for checks/skills (SRD p 77):</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">The GM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.</p><p></p><p>I think that is a significant difference.</p><p></p><p>But there's no reason in principle why spells can't be handled this way too. There are even RPGs that actually take such an approach.</p><p></p><p>And the converse, too. Non-magical utility mechanics can be designed in a "player gets to declare success" way.</p><p></p><p>I think that this does not speak to [MENTION=11831]The_Furious_Puffin[/MENTION]'s point. Yes, the GM can frame the fiction so as to make certain action declarations ineffective. This can happen to spells and to skills (eg the GM can declare that the PC's tools all fell out of his/her backpack back when s/he was crossing the river, and that the lock can't just be picked using one's bare hands).</p><p></p><p>The issue is - if the fiction is apt for making the action declaration, do the mechanics interpose GM discretion/decision-making between declaration and success? When it comes to most versions of D&D, the answer is "yes" for skills and "no" for utility spells.</p><p></p><p>I wonder how common the second thing is. My feeling - based on a mixture of instinct and reading forum posts - is that it's not very common.</p><p></p><p>Not quite. DMG, p 39: "Naturally, magic-user player characters will do their utmost to acquire books of spells and scrolls in order to complete their own spell books. To those acquired, the magic-user will add 1 (and ONLY 1) spell when he or she actually gains an experience level". The book doesn't say who chooses; there is then the "% chance to know spells" rule.</p><p></p><p></p><p>What about this comparison: a player builds a 5e fighter who uses STR weapons, but chooses leather armour rather than a heavier armour.</p><p></p><p>Anyone who looks at the rules for AC, the rules for encumbrance, and knows how attacks work in 5e, will see that Hide or a Chain Shirt are almost strictly superior to Leather or Studded Leather for a character with DEX 15 or less. But it's hard to work out how much better they are than heavy armours which give better ACs without the system mastery to understand how easy it might be to counteract - or just put up with - the Stealth penalty. And unless you read your class rules, how do you know that you won't get something to buff your AC wearing Leather (say, like 1st ed AD&D barbarians).</p><p></p><p>Similarly, anyone who knows the 4e rules for attacks will know that a longbow isn't that good without DEX; and anyone who looks through the fighter class abilities ("exploits") will quickly see that none of them buff bow attacks, and that nearly all of them require being in melee in order to be brought into play.</p><p></p><p>I don't think the relative lack of power 4e fighters have with bows is all that obscure; just as I don't think the relative inferiority of Leather armour for 5e STR fighters is all that obscure, even though they're proficient with it. And in either case, play will quickly clear things up: the 5e player will work out that there is no benefit to wearing Leather rather than Hide at least; and the 4e player will work out that a bow is only useful if your opponent is too far away to make closing, or throwing STR-based weapons, viable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6885849, member: 42582"] I don't think there's a passage in the 5e books that says that, for a spell to take effect, the GM must agree that it does. Whereas there is this passage for checks/skills (SRD p 77): [indent]The GM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.[/indent] I think that is a significant difference. But there's no reason in principle why spells can't be handled this way too. There are even RPGs that actually take such an approach. And the converse, too. Non-magical utility mechanics can be designed in a "player gets to declare success" way. I think that this does not speak to [MENTION=11831]The_Furious_Puffin[/MENTION]'s point. Yes, the GM can frame the fiction so as to make certain action declarations ineffective. This can happen to spells and to skills (eg the GM can declare that the PC's tools all fell out of his/her backpack back when s/he was crossing the river, and that the lock can't just be picked using one's bare hands). The issue is - if the fiction is apt for making the action declaration, do the mechanics interpose GM discretion/decision-making between declaration and success? When it comes to most versions of D&D, the answer is "yes" for skills and "no" for utility spells. I wonder how common the second thing is. My feeling - based on a mixture of instinct and reading forum posts - is that it's not very common. Not quite. DMG, p 39: "Naturally, magic-user player characters will do their utmost to acquire books of spells and scrolls in order to complete their own spell books. To those acquired, the magic-user will add 1 (and ONLY 1) spell when he or she actually gains an experience level". The book doesn't say who chooses; there is then the "% chance to know spells" rule. What about this comparison: a player builds a 5e fighter who uses STR weapons, but chooses leather armour rather than a heavier armour. Anyone who looks at the rules for AC, the rules for encumbrance, and knows how attacks work in 5e, will see that Hide or a Chain Shirt are almost strictly superior to Leather or Studded Leather for a character with DEX 15 or less. But it's hard to work out how much better they are than heavy armours which give better ACs without the system mastery to understand how easy it might be to counteract - or just put up with - the Stealth penalty. And unless you read your class rules, how do you know that you won't get something to buff your AC wearing Leather (say, like 1st ed AD&D barbarians). Similarly, anyone who knows the 4e rules for attacks will know that a longbow isn't that good without DEX; and anyone who looks through the fighter class abilities ("exploits") will quickly see that none of them buff bow attacks, and that nearly all of them require being in melee in order to be brought into play. I don't think the relative lack of power 4e fighters have with bows is all that obscure; just as I don't think the relative inferiority of Leather armour for 5e STR fighters is all that obscure, even though they're proficient with it. And in either case, play will quickly clear things up: the 5e player will work out that there is no benefit to wearing Leather rather than Hide at least; and the 4e player will work out that a bow is only useful if your opponent is too far away to make closing, or throwing STR-based weapons, viable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I'm *GASP* Actually Going to Be Playing 5e in a Few Weeks -- What are the Character Creation Pitfalls to Avoid?
Top