Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8732057" data-attributes="member: 97077">Again, I would say this isn't about good faith play. I imagine we agree that part of good faith play is following the rules. If the rules the DM sets before the players lead to what the DM considers &quot;gaming the system,&quot; where does the problem actually lay? It's not with the players in my view - it's with the rule or the DM or both.It's also not punishment to set clear rules and expectations and help players rise to that standard, if they need it. Your description about what you want to do precedes the call for a roll. After that, there is no embellishment. You can add a proficiency that fits the description you already offered, not one you choose to offer after the call for a roll. That is clear, easy to understand, and a constraint that fosters creativity, not stifles it in my experience. As a bonus, it doesn't lead to the &quot;generally negative&quot; outcome that was mentioned.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8732057, member: 97077"] Again, I would say this isn't about good faith play. I imagine we agree that part of good faith play is following the rules. If the rules the DM sets before the players lead to what the DM considers "gaming the system," where does the problem actually lay? It's not with the players in my view - it's with the rule or the DM or both. It's also not punishment to set clear rules and expectations and help players rise to that standard, if they need it. Your description about what you want to do precedes the call for a roll. After that, there is no embellishment. You can add a proficiency that fits the description you already offered, not one you choose to offer after the call for a roll. That is clear, easy to understand, and a constraint that fosters creativity, not stifles it in my experience. As a bonus, it doesn't lead to the "generally negative" outcome that was mentioned. [/QUOTE]

Verification