Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 9812177" data-attributes="member: 7031982">I'm confused.  You bolded the part I was referring to: "Only call for a roll if there is a meaningful consequence of failure."  Why do you read it "completely differently"?EDIT:Oh, I see.  I bolded the part you wrote at the end.  Yeah, I very much disagree that failing to find a door is a consequence of failing a check.  You don't know the door is there before you roll.  You don't know the door is there after the roll.  Nothing has changed for your character, therefore there is no consequence of failure.The problem with defining "meaningful consequence" as "failure to succeed" is that it's always true, and therefore the condition itself is meaningless.  There has to be a trade-off that results in a meaningful decision.  If the player (or players) ever think, "Well, I may as well try. Can't hurt." then you don't have a meaningful consequence.  (A chorus of "Can I try, too?" is a good sign that you don't have a meaningful consequence.)A consequence can also be that you pay a cost for the attempt, whether or not you succeed, therefore if you fail you've paid the cost but not reaped the benefit.In general I don't think there are a lot of meaningful consequences for failing to find secret doors.  The only ones I can think of are different versions of time costs:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You are playing a game (like Shadowdark) in which actions like searching consume turns, and turns generate wandering monster rolls.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You are under some scenario-specific time pressure, such as being pursued.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You are in combat and searching consumes your action.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification