Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 7310905" data-attributes="member: 6777696">This is a swift-moving thread and you're posting quite a bit.On the topic of your original post, where you excerpted one line from an unnamed &quot;published product,&quot; I think most people in this thread are in agreement that that is not the best presented advice to a GM. I mean, I don't know what the product is, and I only have your descriptions of the context, but I'm not sure that it's a great sentence. (I find things like this in adventures all the time. I was reading an adventure last night with a secret door mechanism in a floor. The adventure suggested that the GM roll for every 10 minutes characters spent to see if they &quot;accidentally stepped on the mechanism,&quot; but included no description of the mechanism by which characters could actually actively find the mechanism. wtf.)The bolded text you quoted is tangential. You can ignore it if it doesn't speak to you. It was in part responding to something else you said in a different post, because I didn't feel like multi-posting or multi-quoting.Mainly, what I am talking about is your repeated dismissal of DM's who don't just call a check ON EVERYTHING as DM's who operating from an &quot;auto-play checklist.&quot; That's not a sidebar. That is what all of these threads boil down to with you. You accuse DM's who adjudicate PC actions in any other way than calling for a skill check of being arbitrary, gotcha DMs.I believe, though it's tough to track sometimes, that you were responding to [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], who eschews skill checks in his game. I believe lanefan plays AD&amp;D 1e. In his case, he would never reference the character perception score, because there is no perception score in AD&amp;D. Lanefan also, by my reading, does expect his players to role-play their ability scores, so it's not that he ignores them. He just has a different way of interacting with them.So, the daylight, the major gap between us, is that you keep disparaging a pretty broad swath of play approaches using terms like &quot;auto-play checklist,&quot; &quot;magic words,&quot; &quot;gotcha,&quot; etc. That's not a valid characterization of any of the approaches I've seen described here.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="redrick, post: 7310905, member: 6777696"] This is a swift-moving thread and you're posting quite a bit. On the topic of your original post, where you excerpted one line from an unnamed "published product," I think most people in this thread are in agreement that that is not the best presented advice to a GM. I mean, I don't know what the product is, and I only have your descriptions of the context, but I'm not sure that it's a great sentence. (I find things like this in adventures all the time. I was reading an adventure last night with a secret door mechanism in a floor. The adventure suggested that the GM roll for every 10 minutes characters spent to see if they "accidentally stepped on the mechanism," but included no description of the mechanism by which characters could actually actively find the mechanism. wtf.) The bolded text you quoted is tangential. You can ignore it if it doesn't speak to you. It was in part responding to something else you said in a different post, because I didn't feel like multi-posting or multi-quoting. Mainly, what I am talking about is your repeated dismissal of DM's who don't just call a check ON EVERYTHING as DM's who operating from an "auto-play checklist." That's not a sidebar. That is what all of these threads boil down to with you. You accuse DM's who adjudicate PC actions in any other way than calling for a skill check of being arbitrary, gotcha DMs. I believe, though it's tough to track sometimes, that you were responding to [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], who eschews skill checks in his game. I believe lanefan plays AD&D 1e. In his case, he would never reference the character perception score, because there is no perception score in AD&D. Lanefan also, by my reading, [I]does[/I] expect his players to role-play their ability scores, so it's not that he ignores them. He just has a different way of interacting with them. So, the daylight, the major gap between us, is that you keep disparaging a pretty broad swath of play approaches using terms like "auto-play checklist," "magic words," "gotcha," etc. That's not a valid characterization of any of the approaches I've seen described here. [/QUOTE]

Verification