Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)
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: 8055203" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>The task to be resolved was whether the character recalled the relevance of the NPC's name. The task succeeded - the character recalled it. However, there's a setback because of the failed check - the NPC appears to know that the character knows. "Progress combined with a setback" is one of the two PHB options the DM has to narrating the result of the adventurer's actions after a failed check. It's also the best option in my view to avoid situations where a failed check and null result can incentivize the very "metagaming" about which some posters are concerned (see practicalm's post and my subsequent response upthread).</p><p></p><p>Further, the NPC's reaction does not necessarily say anything about the PC, as you suggest. If there's a task to be resolved in that regard, it's the <em>NPC </em>trying to suss out what the <em>PC </em>knows. And in this example, the DM is effectively saying that the task is trivially easy for the NPC for reasons the DM is free to establish and thus there is no roll needed to resolve it.</p><p></p><p>It looks like you're mostly objecting to the stakes here as [USER=6776133]@Bawylie[/USER] says which I would typically go over with a player prior to the roll anyway, so you'd have a chance to object. But ultimately, it sounds like you either (1) think that a failed check resulting in "You don't know" is a meaningful consequence for failure in context or (2) want to make a check with no meaningful consequences at all. With regard to (2), if there's no meaningful consequence for failure to your task, then there's not going to be a roll anyway. (As an aside and to address your statement regarding the same, since there must be a meaningful consequence for failure in order for there to be a roll, then I would very much expect you as a player to avoid rolling wherever possible and shoot for automatic success since that's the smart play.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8055203, member: 97077"] The task to be resolved was whether the character recalled the relevance of the NPC's name. The task succeeded - the character recalled it. However, there's a setback because of the failed check - the NPC appears to know that the character knows. "Progress combined with a setback" is one of the two PHB options the DM has to narrating the result of the adventurer's actions after a failed check. It's also the best option in my view to avoid situations where a failed check and null result can incentivize the very "metagaming" about which some posters are concerned (see practicalm's post and my subsequent response upthread). Further, the NPC's reaction does not necessarily say anything about the PC, as you suggest. If there's a task to be resolved in that regard, it's the [I]NPC [/I]trying to suss out what the [I]PC [/I]knows. And in this example, the DM is effectively saying that the task is trivially easy for the NPC for reasons the DM is free to establish and thus there is no roll needed to resolve it. It looks like you're mostly objecting to the stakes here as [USER=6776133]@Bawylie[/USER] says which I would typically go over with a player prior to the roll anyway, so you'd have a chance to object. But ultimately, it sounds like you either (1) think that a failed check resulting in "You don't know" is a meaningful consequence for failure in context or (2) want to make a check with no meaningful consequences at all. With regard to (2), if there's no meaningful consequence for failure to your task, then there's not going to be a roll anyway. (As an aside and to address your statement regarding the same, since there must be a meaningful consequence for failure in order for there to be a roll, then I would very much expect you as a player to avoid rolling wherever possible and shoot for automatic success since that's the smart play.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)
Top