Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jbear" data-source="post: 5993270" data-attributes="member: 75065">I'll admit I don't quite understand either. But I'd quite like to.If the question is simply what my opinion is about tripping oozes, then my reply would be that I think it's silly. I would often apply DM fiat when running 4e when powers that didn't fit simply didn't work. I didn't do it often, but my players always accepted it when I did. They didn't really care about the rules. They left them in my hands and got on with playing the game. I made sure that I applied them in a fair and consistent way and to be honest they very very very rarely ever got in the way of our gaming, which is why I love 4e so much.But I'm not sure if that answers the question accurately or not.So here is what I do when I play: For example I decide I'm going to attempt to sneak down a corridor with my character. I roll the dice and depending on the result will describe how well I did at managing that. If I roll a 1 I might say I stood in a metal bucket accidently and clanked my way down the corridor. Or if I'm about to attack then I'll stop, roll the dice. If I hit I'll roll damage, and depending on the results I'll interpret how things went based on the rolls, how close they came to hitting and how much damage they dealt. If I miss badly I might invent something happening which got in the way of my intended action.I do the same as a DM. I decide an intended action and then describe how it turns out once I have seen the result of the dice. If someone is giving a speech I might ask them to roll diplomacy and depending on the roll interpret the way that the speech was actually delivered despite the speech delivered inside the characters head (this is how I deal with PCs with 8 charisma giving rousing speeches).There are situations that don't seem to make sense like a fighter pushing back a giant, but in that situation I'd roll, if it misses I might describe crashing into its immovable leg with shield and sword, but if it hit I might describe shoving my blade beneath its toenail which causes it to take a step back with a yelp of pain.Also with interrupt powers I might change the initial description of the action to include how I imagine how the interaction of events plays out.I also allow my players a "Do Something Cool Encounter Card". They describe their intended "Cool Action, which alters one of their existing powers in a cool way which interacts with the situation or terrain present in the encounter. If I agree that it is indeed cool, then they roll the dice and depending on the result I describe how it plays out. Even when it fails something cool (even if minor) always happens.So, which one am I doing? That's the part I don't get. It seems like I am doing Fiction in the Middle.</blockquote>

Verification