Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
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="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8059211" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>The baseline assumption, stated in the rules, is that characters are usually alert for danger. I'm not going to require my players to add, "oh, and I look out for danger" to any action declarations they make, they get that as assumed -- if it's compatible with the action declared, at least. This last is a pure GM judgement call, which isn't surprising in that 5e's unspoken core mechanic is "GM decides." I'd recommend making sure a player understands that a given action would preclude being alert to danger, but that's advice, not rules.</p><p></p><p>I think, though, that I might detect an issue hovering off-stage around "action declaration." This is jargon for the player telling you what their PC does. It's used to isolate a specific "do" so you can look at how the resolution mechanics would work there. Most of the "action declarations" a player gives in a game never rise to the level of consideration for use of mechanics. "I walk across the room," for instance, is an action declaration, but, unless there's something in the scene (or in the GM's notes) that would complicate that, no time is spent and the GM narrates it so (or allows the player to do so and continue). There's nothing mechanical about an action declaration -- it's not a call for a roll or anything like that (and, in 5e, players should not be calling for rolls according to the rules, although many allow it as a holdover from previous editions). It's just a statement of what the PC is doing.</p><p></p><p>This isn't resolvable with the information provided -- something's missing. Why is the player watching the crowd, for instance? A good action declaration requires both a method -- the how -- and a goal -- the why or what. You've given a method, but not a goal, so I don't know if calling for a check (or refering to a passive score) is appropriate in this situation. If it's a roll to add flavor, that's not how the system is presented, but it's a fine way to use it to determine if something interesting is present. Not my style, though, but I can see it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8059211, member: 16814"] The baseline assumption, stated in the rules, is that characters are usually alert for danger. I'm not going to require my players to add, "oh, and I look out for danger" to any action declarations they make, they get that as assumed -- if it's compatible with the action declared, at least. This last is a pure GM judgement call, which isn't surprising in that 5e's unspoken core mechanic is "GM decides." I'd recommend making sure a player understands that a given action would preclude being alert to danger, but that's advice, not rules. I think, though, that I might detect an issue hovering off-stage around "action declaration." This is jargon for the player telling you what their PC does. It's used to isolate a specific "do" so you can look at how the resolution mechanics would work there. Most of the "action declarations" a player gives in a game never rise to the level of consideration for use of mechanics. "I walk across the room," for instance, is an action declaration, but, unless there's something in the scene (or in the GM's notes) that would complicate that, no time is spent and the GM narrates it so (or allows the player to do so and continue). There's nothing mechanical about an action declaration -- it's not a call for a roll or anything like that (and, in 5e, players should not be calling for rolls according to the rules, although many allow it as a holdover from previous editions). It's just a statement of what the PC is doing. This isn't resolvable with the information provided -- something's missing. Why is the player watching the crowd, for instance? A good action declaration requires both a method -- the how -- and a goal -- the why or what. You've given a method, but not a goal, so I don't know if calling for a check (or refering to a passive score) is appropriate in this situation. If it's a roll to add flavor, that's not how the system is presented, but it's a fine way to use it to determine if something interesting is present. Not my style, though, but I can see it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)
Top