Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
Intimidation DCs
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="iserith" data-source="post: 6986579" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>1. As with any other action declaration, the DM must consider the player's stated goal (what the player wants to accomplish) and approach (what the character does to try to achieve the goal) before deciding if the outcome is a success, a failure, or is uncertain. Only in the latter case do we ask for a check; otherwise, we just narrate the result e.g. "The goblin gives up the secret..." or "The goblin is resolute and does not divulge anything..." All this requires is the DM's knowledge of the context of the situation and the input the player has given. You can run a perfectly fine game with just making the DCs 10, 15, or 20 with the odd 25 here and there. So I wouldn't sweat worrying about exactly what the DC should be in these cases. </p><p></p><p>2. I wouldn't consider this to be a contest, nor do I think it's okay for the DM to make ability checks when monsters are trying to deceive, entertain, intimidate, or persuade PCs as there is no uncertainty here as to the outcome of what the PCs do. (The PCs will do what the players say they will do!) Some folks seem to ask for those checks to gauge how intimidating (or persuasive or entertaining or deceptive) the monster is being and leave it to the players to declare their response as they see fit. I think this just creates an extra step for no good reason. I prefer to just describe the environment and let the PCs declare their response as per the basic conversation of the game (Basic Rules, page 3).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 6986579, member: 97077"] 1. As with any other action declaration, the DM must consider the player's stated goal (what the player wants to accomplish) and approach (what the character does to try to achieve the goal) before deciding if the outcome is a success, a failure, or is uncertain. Only in the latter case do we ask for a check; otherwise, we just narrate the result e.g. "The goblin gives up the secret..." or "The goblin is resolute and does not divulge anything..." All this requires is the DM's knowledge of the context of the situation and the input the player has given. You can run a perfectly fine game with just making the DCs 10, 15, or 20 with the odd 25 here and there. So I wouldn't sweat worrying about exactly what the DC should be in these cases. 2. I wouldn't consider this to be a contest, nor do I think it's okay for the DM to make ability checks when monsters are trying to deceive, entertain, intimidate, or persuade PCs as there is no uncertainty here as to the outcome of what the PCs do. (The PCs will do what the players say they will do!) Some folks seem to ask for those checks to gauge how intimidating (or persuasive or entertaining or deceptive) the monster is being and leave it to the players to declare their response as they see fit. I think this just creates an extra step for no good reason. I prefer to just describe the environment and let the PCs declare their response as per the basic conversation of the game (Basic Rules, page 3). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Intimidation DCs
Top