Legends and Lore - Player vs. Character Poll Thread

[Balesir]

Which c) is, in a nutshell.

Not quite; (c) says the DM rolls, not the player.

I actually think the flaw in the poll is bigger than this. There is an additional (missing) option where the non-combat situations become a mini-game constructed using tools and elements provided by the game rules, and the players are 'invited' to engage with the mini-game (just as they do with combat). The "players engage the world" option I have found, through long experience, to be conflicted, because the game world is only extant with full fidelity in the DM's head, and yet the players are asked to engage with it (in "traditional" RPGs) without being given any knowledge or control over it. With a mini-game, at least the elements are explicit and understandable by all involved.

 

[Agamon]

Not quite; (c) says the DM rolls, not the player.

That's splitting hairs. The intent of c) is as an example of a combination of a) and b). What version of D&D has the DM rolling all of the player's skill checks? Some yes, if the results aren't immediately known to the PC. Perhaps it should say "and either the player or DM rolls" instead.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I voted one because I am willing to accept that. I don't like the DM rolling hte dice in these circumstances but I would prefer to have the option of the player describes what his character is doing and if necessary rolling search or preception.

 

[Mark CMG]

Perhaps it should say "and either the player or DM rolls" instead.

That would seem to be a smart revision worth noting.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I voted one because I am willing to accept that. I don't like the DM rolling hte dice in these circumstances but I would prefer to have the option of the player describes what his character is doing and if necessary rolling search or preception.

 

[Pentius]

I voted 3, because that seems about right to me. I'd take 1 over 2, though.

All of my most boring times playing the game involve long hallways that must be searched inch by inch(note: hallways of any physical length are Long when searched this way) because the one time you don't search hard enough, you get a poison dart in the neck.

This way of searching does, in a way, push for more player immersion and engagement of the game world, but it's entirely in a way I do not want. I want the player engaged with the character, with the situation, with trying to bring about in character goals. Searching every inch looking for secret doors or hidden treasure feels more like a puzzle game. Puzzle games are fine, lots of people like them, I personally want something else from my gaming experience. I'm not in the dungeon to poke at cobblestones with a 10' pole, I'm there to kill the trolls before they can eat my kidnapped friends.

 

[howandwhy99]

I voted 3. I prefer to have the players roll when playing the active party as it lends control, but this is only a semblance of control. It really doesn't matter who rolls the dice in the end for their result, does it? If so, I'd rather they all rolled via a cup roller or something.

More important to me is the initiator of action and this I put squarely on the players. They are the one's who decide what to check and how they are going to check it. Abstract rolling is fine, but it costs more game time - typically quite a bit more than inspired search attempts. Going through in detail takes more playing time, but almost always takes less game time in the end. It's up to the players what the priority is though.

 

[Balesir]

That's splitting hairs.

Arguably so, yes - that's why I said "not quite". I was merely trying to identify why Nagol might have considered that none of the options was what s/he really wanted.

The intent of c) is as an example of a combination of a) and b). What version of D&D has the DM rolling all of the player's skill checks? Some yes, if the results aren't immediately known to the PC. Perhaps it should say "and either the player or DM rolls" instead.

That would have been a good modification, yes. So would including players taking decisions based on the game situation to garner rolls or automatic revelations, but the OP was simply replicating the original poll on the WotC site...

 

[Bluenose]

None of the above.

I prefer players to roll, and then roleplay it. You might roll very badly, but if you then manage to describe what happened amusingly enough you'll still fail, but something else happens which gives you some sort of benefit. If you roll really well, and then don't bother to say much, it's a success but a fairly basic one. And a medium roll, which you roll-play well, is more likely to succeed than one that's treated superficially.

 

[Nagol]

Which c) is, in a nutshell.

As Balesir already noted, c) has the DM rolling as appropriate. I prefer the player be in charge of the dice for a couple of reasons:

1) Players choose their actions based upon a negotiated and understood level of risk. It provides a sense of agency to the player to be in charge of the determining roll.

2) It reduces the possibility of illusionism. If the DM were to roll, he can elect to do so covertly and then ignore the result in favour of his fiat. That allows the DM to convert c) into b) without the group's knowledge or consent. Many people argue that this is a perfectly legitimate and worthy tactic for a DM. I am not one of them.