Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7161305" data-attributes="member: 996">Yes.   Not so much, IMHO.  But, stipulating that, yes. OK, then, if certainty can be judged in spite of uncertainty always going the other way, that's consistent.  (Sounds ironic, I guess, but consistent.) I'd think being aware of how difficult something is or how good the PC is at something would be part of establishing uncertainty.  But I guess it doesn't /have/ to be to the point of knowing both numbers, exactly. Can't agree with that as it obviates a play benefit of having passives, in the first place.  If you still have to provoke players into essentially pixel-bitching around to assure that they don't miss anything, might as well be all active checks.</blockquote>