Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rhenny" data-source="post: 6834719" data-attributes="member: 18333">I rarely use passive checks.&nbsp; If I do, they are most likely for just perception, and often, I have the opposing creature or even object roll rather than setting a DC so that even the highest passive perception pcs can fail once in a while and sometimes even the low passive perceptions can get lucky.But for the most part, I'm a fan of what iserith proposes.&nbsp; In general, I try to frame a situation and then let each player tell me what his or her pc does or attempts in narrative.&nbsp; Then I decide if a roll is necessary.&nbsp; For when I know the players really like to roll dice rather than just play a narrative game, I will often tell them to make checks for some of the easier actions/attempts, but instead of setting a DC, I basically just tell them all they need to roll is higher than a 1.&nbsp; You'd be surprised at how much tension even just that small chance of failure engenders.As for the Critical Role situation that KahlessNestor mentions, I agree with KahlessNestor.&nbsp; Those guys are voice actors who thrive on improv and dealing with curveballs.&nbsp; Grog's fumble and failure to break the skull did yield excellent results for the story/rp. In general, I really like what Matt Mercer and the Critical Role players do.Overall, I think the decision to call for a roll, use passive skills/perception, etc. really comes down to what the players like better.&nbsp; In my experience, most players like to take the dice into their own hands, but they don't mind automatically succeeding on reasonable tasks when those tasks align with their character concepts (background, class, attributes, etc.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rhenny, post: 6834719, member: 18333"] I rarely use passive checks. If I do, they are most likely for just perception, and often, I have the opposing creature or even object roll rather than setting a DC so that even the highest passive perception pcs can fail once in a while and sometimes even the low passive perceptions can get lucky. But for the most part, I'm a fan of what iserith proposes. In general, I try to frame a situation and then let each player tell me what his or her pc does or attempts in narrative. Then I decide if a roll is necessary. For when I know the players really like to roll dice rather than just play a narrative game, I will often tell them to make checks for some of the easier actions/attempts, but instead of setting a DC, I basically just tell them all they need to roll is higher than a 1. You'd be surprised at how much tension even just that small chance of failure engenders. As for the Critical Role situation that KahlessNestor mentions, I agree with KahlessNestor. Those guys are voice actors who thrive on improv and dealing with curveballs. Grog's fumble and failure to break the skull did yield excellent results for the story/rp. In general, I really like what Matt Mercer and the Critical Role players do. Overall, I think the decision to call for a roll, use passive skills/perception, etc. really comes down to what the players like better. In my experience, most players like to take the dice into their own hands, but they don't mind automatically succeeding on reasonable tasks when those tasks align with their character concepts (background, class, attributes, etc.) [/QUOTE]

Verification