Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="buzz" data-source="post: 3139813" data-attributes="member: 6777">Sure he can. That's the point I've been trying to make with guards example. The DM can subvert your successful Hide/Move Silently roll by simply saying, "You manage to be whisper quiet and hide in the shadows... but a guard decides to check on the king's fish tank. He walks into the room, sees you, and starts shouting for backup."In BW, there isn't the same specific task focus, and the achieved intent is sacrosanct. The GM can say that a guard walks in to feed the fish, but that can't change the outcome of the roll. If you were successful, the in-game narrative would be that you managed to duck under a desk as the guard walked in, and you watch him feed the fish from your hiding spot. He leaves, and you go back to picking the lock or whatever.If the GM said that the fish-feeding guard negated your roll, he'd basically be saying, "You know when I said that a successful roll meant you stayed hidden? I lied." At that point, you're not playing BW (or similar games) anywhere close to the rules. The GM is simply not given the power to do stuff like that.It's like if you were playing Monopoly, and one player insisted that since they were using the racecar, they didn't have to roll dice; they could just "drive" to any spot on the board, and even run over other player's pieces. They simply are not playing Monopoly anymore. Ergo, we're beyond talking about the pros and cons of Monopoly.Agh. Sorry to keep going off on this tangent, Croth.</blockquote>

Verification