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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6736913" data-attributes="member: 97077">Just because a character or monster is trying an action does not mean a check is required. When the outcome of of that action is uncertain, the dice determine the results. When the outcome is not uncertain, the DM just narrates the results. (Or in some cases, the players do as I will demonstrate.)So what is Beat Horsedeath trying to do? He's trying, for example, to get the PCs to surrender (goal) by putting on a fierce display of battle prowess (approach). The DM now asks him or herself: Does Beat Horsedeath achieve his goal given his approach, fail to achieve his goal, or is there uncertainty?Before the DM can answer that question, he or she also has to consider how players are in control of how their characters act, think, and what they say. Which means that whether Beat Horsedeath achieves his goal given his approach is up to the players, not the DM, and not the dice. Therefore, the players determine the results of this part of the interaction. They might surrender, flee, attack - whatever they like.You accused me of "hiding mechanics." I have proven this is not the case. I invoked no mechanics that could have been hidden. You keep referencing things like "it's just you telling a story" and "it's your out of game skill to tell the story," so I guess it's appropriate to remind you that D&D is a roleplaying game of storytelling in worlds of sword and sorcery. So yes, yes I am telling a story. As are the players.With that in mind, when the DM is describing the environment (Beat Horsedeath trying to intimidate the PCs, for example), the DM is indeed referencing the game world by describing it. I'm not sure how anyone can see it differently. Perhaps you will kindly explain what you mean.I think it is also more accurate to say of my position that I feel my way is better for me and for those with whom I game, not that it is universally better.Ability checks (which is what I assume you mean by "skill checks") test a character’s or monster’s innate talent and training in an effort to overcome a challenge. However you decide to describe your "awesome jump," the DM reduces your description to a goal and approach and decides whether you succeed, fail, or whether the outcome is uncertain enough that you need to make an ability check to determine an outcome. Also, there is no need for an ability check in D&D 5e when it comes to jumping except in specific circumstances. Assuming there is not circumstance that is limiting you from moving at least 17 feet, I would just say you succeed in that jump, no roll. If you can't move at least 17 feet, then I would just say you fail, no roll.Your hobgoblin-nerf sword analogy also doesn't hold. The DM describes the environment. The player describes what he or she wants to do. The DM narrates the result of the adventurer's actions. When the result is uncertain, the dice and mechanics come into play. How well you describe a thing doesn't weigh into it - only your goal and approach matters for the purposes of adjudication. An awesome, evocative description of an attack is the same in my view as "I attack the hobgobglin with my sword..." where it comes to determining uncertainty.As I said, you can try to do anything. I didn't say you will succeed. In the case of your Deadlands game, if you would have tried, you may have put the GM into the position of admitting that it was not, in fact, a spell affecting your character.What I mean by that is the the rules in an RPG are largely descriptive ("here's how you can use the rules to adjudicate a thing if you want to"), not prescriptive ("you can only do the things the rules say you can do"). It's not about "working around the 'don't ask questions' rule." It's about doing what I can to get out of a vampire's clutches. As I already mentioned, I would have at the very least tried to confirm I was under the effect of a spell via an appropriate in-game action. It is always a good policy to confirm one's assumptions in my view."Based on what I know or have heard about magic and, specifically, charm spells, I try to tell whether or not I'm under the effect of one."That is a fictional action that the DM can now adjudicate into success, failure, or uncertainty.Those are options. Valid ones that keep the action in the fiction and the scene moving forward rather than question-and-answer between the DM and player.I'm truly sorry you had a bad experience with this DM. I could share plenty of bad-DM stories as well. But please don't make the mistake of lumping me in with this person simply because I prefer that players spend more time doing stuff with their characters in-game than in asking questions of the DM.</blockquote>

Verification