NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7061683" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Yes, and I agree. Your using the DC/skill check mechanic is not railroading. My point is that simply saying yes is also not railroading. Hence I don't see either approach as being much better than the other. Yes, you did make that point earlier. I mentioned in my post that I didn't think that the best way to achieve drama was always to call for a roll. Meaning, at times, the chance of failure is significant and so we need to use the dice to hep determine the outcome. Other times, I think it is easier to simply proceed and let the actual drama of the situation be the main focus rather than the result of a skill check. I think that the player's desire to try and salvage some of the blood form the corpse in order to bring it to his naga patron is an interesting idea and I'd prefer to see how that might play out more than I prefer to see if a die roll determines if there is a bowl in the room or not. Is it? I mean....there's a corpse right there. It's not like a tipped pitcher of water that has drained. There's still blood in that corpse.I don't agree with that at all. First, I don't know if the DM has to already have all backstory determined in order to adjudicate divination attempts. He can simply determine that on the fly, using his judgment and all that has happened in the campaign so far as his guides. Second, there's no reason that how he approaches the divination adjudication need be "traditional". Depending on the circumstances, perhaps he can involve the players in the process. Maybe he can describe details loosely....say give a vague description of a person that the divination reveals, and then see who the players think it is. Well, 5E has largely removed major concerns about the time it takes to heal....they're very abstract and quick. It never takes days or weeks to be back to full fighting strength. Some see that as being a problem in and of itself. I rather like it as it keeps things moving. I prefer dynamic situations that can continue to develop separate of the PC actions to some extent rather than static environments that only change when the PCs interact with them. As for resource management....given how easy it would be to either handwave this entirely, or to track every arrow and every ration of food, or any point in the spectrum between those two extremes, I don't really see this as a problem. In my game, we tend to handwave this for the most part....unless there are story elements or developments that make it matter, like if they've been wandering the wilderness for some time, or something similar. A bit pedantic, but fair enough. My point being that there is no mechanic beyond DM judgment. I don't know if that really constitutes a system. Your comment made it seem like you would introduce some kind of mechanical expression. You seem to prefer to have hard and fast mechanics of some kind in place for most things, and have a distaste for anything that can be seen as DM fiat. I don't agree with that assessment of bounded accuracy at all. PC Build is still important....in bounded accuracy, a +1 bonus tends to be more meaningful than a +1 bonus in other systems (not all other systems, I am sure, but let's say other editions of D&D and some of the OSR clones). And resource expenditure matters quite a bit if the game is played with those resources in mind (i.e. making sure there are enough encounters per day to require some decision making in that regard). That I can agree with. I mean, as I said, we abandoned the XP system long ago, so I am actually not sure....does 5E's XP system only reward experience for the creatures defeated or otherwise overcome? I would think that there would be options for awarding XP for roleplaying or for clever play and things like that. Even if there's not, it's easy enough to do it on one's own.Sure, and I suppose that it's the word "always" in your description that is a key to your view. I doubt that most games always rely on GM only for the framing and resolution. So if you mean that literally, then I can understand, but if you mean that any game that favors or skews toward GM driven framing and resolution is a railroad, then that's where I would disagree.</blockquote>

Verification