Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Modeling Uncertainty
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7000254" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>Regarding your example, I don't think that even needs to be a consideration. Either the character succeeds at the proposed action or does not.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that there is: <em>What do you do now that you know the guard is lying?</em></p><p></p><p>This also helps the scene move forward to the next stage of the conflict. Leaving things uncertain might have the effect of causing the players to hesitate and the scene does not move forward. That's something I care about, personally, but others might not.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It appears to be a concern that stems from the desire for there to be uncertainty even after mechanics are applied to <em>resolve </em>said uncertainty, not create it. Which, to me, means I have to go back and address that desire in some fashion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"I examine the guard's mannerisms and body language in an effort to see if he's lying."</p><p></p><p>"The guard's body language reveals that he is being untruthful."</p><p></p><p>That is the character interacting with the environment. I don't need to tell the player what his or her character is thinking, right?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I don't think it necessary to develop a schematic. The player just needs to be specific enough that the DM doesn't have to assume what the character is doing and establish that for the player. I'm sure we've all seen situations where the player gives a vague action declaration or asks a question that suggests action. The DM then establishes for the player what the character actually does. (This is a very common way of playing in my experience.) Only sometimes the player says "Wait, I wouldn't have done <em>that</em>." This is a situation to be avoided in my opinion, but is something of a side issue to the overall discussion of course.</p><p></p><p>And so I'd much rather get reasonable specificity out of the player with regard to goal and approach, decide if there's uncertainty as to the outcome, ask for a check if there is, and definitively narrate the result of the action taken. The uncertainty lives in whether the approach will be successful in achieving the goal. I don't think the uncertainty should exist past the roll.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7000254, member: 97077"] Regarding your example, I don't think that even needs to be a consideration. Either the character succeeds at the proposed action or does not. Except that there is: [I]What do you do now that you know the guard is lying?[/I] This also helps the scene move forward to the next stage of the conflict. Leaving things uncertain might have the effect of causing the players to hesitate and the scene does not move forward. That's something I care about, personally, but others might not. It appears to be a concern that stems from the desire for there to be uncertainty even after mechanics are applied to [I]resolve [/I]said uncertainty, not create it. Which, to me, means I have to go back and address that desire in some fashion. "I examine the guard's mannerisms and body language in an effort to see if he's lying." "The guard's body language reveals that he is being untruthful." That is the character interacting with the environment. I don't need to tell the player what his or her character is thinking, right? No, I don't think it necessary to develop a schematic. The player just needs to be specific enough that the DM doesn't have to assume what the character is doing and establish that for the player. I'm sure we've all seen situations where the player gives a vague action declaration or asks a question that suggests action. The DM then establishes for the player what the character actually does. (This is a very common way of playing in my experience.) Only sometimes the player says "Wait, I wouldn't have done [I]that[/I]." This is a situation to be avoided in my opinion, but is something of a side issue to the overall discussion of course. And so I'd much rather get reasonable specificity out of the player with regard to goal and approach, decide if there's uncertainty as to the outcome, ask for a check if there is, and definitively narrate the result of the action taken. The uncertainty lives in whether the approach will be successful in achieving the goal. I don't think the uncertainty should exist past the roll. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Modeling Uncertainty
Top