• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

5E Players: Why Do You Want to Roll a d20?

FrogReaver

Adventurer
The quote of yours I responded to was a response to Iserith's scenario with 8 orcs, not a lone orc.
The first person I mentioned an orc to was ElfCrusher. Then iserith jumped in on that and accused me of arguing in bad faith. It seems you are confused with the flow of events that occurred.
 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith
Admittedly I don't love secret rolls, either. But I'm not staunchly opposed to them.
Chiefly I see it used as a means to combat what some call "metagaming" when the player is given false information but can look at the terrible result he or she just rolled and think "okay, this must be false information then." So the DM rolls it secretly instead. This solution though is self-defeating in my opinion in the sense that all you're really doing is encouraging players to engage in different "metagaming" in that they are discentivized for trying to recall lore altogether (since you don't know if the info is true or false) and instead just quietly act on information the DM might otherwise believe the character has no right to. I'm not going to try to recall lore on flumphs since I won't know if the answer is true or false, so I'll just act on my "player knowledge" about flumphs being vulnerable to psychic. After all, I'm a bard and vicious mockery is a cantrip that I use regularly, so who will gainsay that?

It's a method that I don't think these groups really look at too closely to see all of its many flaws wherein the very thing they're trying to prevent is actually exacerbated or at least just shifted to another place. It could be argued that the player above is acting in bad faith, but since there isn't actually a requirement to have specific knowledge to act in any particular way, it's valid to do that. There are, after all, many approaches to a specific goal.

This is why I think, at least in this case, progress combined with a setback as I described above works better than "you dunno" or false information with or without a secret roll. It deals with all of the aforementioned concerns simultaneously and exists within the standard framework of the rules.

And really this is for the benefit of anyone else reading this since it looks like you don't love it, but would deal with it anyway. I thought my thinking on this might be helpful even if it's a bit off topic.
 

FrogReaver

Adventurer
See, this is where you're arguing in bad faith, by pretending to confuse formally defined actions (of which Grapple is one) with poorly defined tasks that require judgment calls.

All he is saying...and I think you know this...is that the player should say what they do. "Goal and approach" is a useful way of avoiding ambiguity. When you invoke a formally defined action, like Grapple, there is very little ambiguity. It is both goal and approach.

Of course, there are situations where more information might be needed. Maybe the orc is behind bars, so it's not obvious how you grapple him. Or he's too far away. Or you are carrying something heavy with both arms. In all of those cases you would need to add some "approach".

I don't like using the "block" feature, but I think I shall choose to not engage with you further on this topic unless you actually want to have a conversation, instead of engaging in semantic gotchas.
This is too funny. The first bit of criticsm about yall's playstyle and everyone criticisng the playstyle is arguing in bad faith. How many people have yall blocked from this thread alone regarding that?
 

Seramus

Explorer
This is too funny. The first bit of criticsm about yall's playstyle and everyone criticisng the playstyle is arguing in bad faith. How many people have yall blocked from this thread alone regarding that?
Well, the new forums reset my blocks so I imagine this thread is just a fresh reminder to renew old blocks from long ago. For example, I used to have you blocked but now you are not. If I did block you again, it would be for past discussions and not because of this single current discussion.
 

FrogReaver

Adventurer
Well, the new forums reset my blocks so I imagine this thread is just a fresh reminder to renew old blocks from long ago. For example, I used to have you blocked but now you are not. If I did block you again, it would be for past discussions and not because of this single current discussion.
Which is fine. Iserith never had me blocked before. Elfcrusher and I have had each other blocked on and off before.

I just find it funny that Iserith misconstrues my post and then blocks me for that. Then elfcrusher 2 posts later jumps on that boat. I'm pretty sure i'm not the only one in this thread that's experienced that behavior. Just wondering aloud how many others have.
 

Seramus

Explorer
I'm pretty sure i'm not the only one in this thread that's experienced that behavior. Just wondering aloud how many others have.
I’m saying it’s probably happening because of long-standing behavior and past altercations, not specifically the contents of this single thread.
 

FrogReaver

Adventurer
I’m saying it’s probably happening because of long-standing behavior and past altercations, not specifically the contents of this single thread.
I know. I'm saying I don't think that's accurate because that wasn't the case with iserith because he never had me blocked before
 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith
Well, the new forums reset my blocks so I imagine this thread is just a fresh reminder to renew old blocks from long ago. For example, I used to have you blocked but now you are not. If I did block you again, it would be for past discussions and not because of this single current discussion.
Same. I had Hussar blocked before the reformatting but he was unblocked when I saw his responses to this thread. Used to be that if you blocked someone they could not longer see your posts. Not sure if that still works that way. I'm leaving Hussar unblocked for now because I have sympathy for people who have had a string of terrible DMs and he admitted as much in this thread, so I'm weighing his posts against whatever baggage he is projecting onto me. For now. I'm used to people disagreeing with me. What I can't abide are obvious bad faith tactics.
 

FrogReaver

Adventurer
As a point of scientific interest, if Iserith has blocked FrogReaver then Frog is still able to see his posts and ‘react’ to them. This certainly wasn’t possible on the old forums.
yes. I'm wondering if that's how it is working here. maybe you can get iserith to replay if he does have me blocked as I suspect.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I'm sufficiently familiar with Iserith's forum presence to doubt that this is really the reason.
I don't know the real reason he blocked me. I tried asking once when he unblocked me for a couple of days. I responded to one of his posts and literally his reply was "don't do that". I replied "what, exactly?" Then he blocked me again with no clarification. I will admit that when he was laying out is approach I pointed out that he skipped a clarifying sentence, ignored the subsequent paragraph/bullet points and didn't mention the DMG section on traps.

I have no problem whatsoever with different people having different styles or different interpretation of the rules. Different approaches to the game are going to work for different people. I do get tired of people saying "The rules say" when it's only one interpretation. Or that somehow "the rules say" implies that any other opinion is not valid. When Jeremy Crawford or one of the devs comes out extolling the virtues of "Goal and Approach" along with some of the other guidelines and say that those styles are what they intended, I'll give it a little more weight. Ignore it most likely, but at least then it would have some legitimacy.

Then again I've never blocked anyone. But differences of opinion? Sometimes we're going to agree sometimes we're not. If I found someone was being offensive or making personal attacks I'd report it. All I know is that he's never reported me for offensive behavior as far as I can tell.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Maybe you remember all of those things, but a lot of other people remember less. You just rolled higher than they did and remember more. Why? Because memory DOES work that way. You don't always remember everything, and sometimes you remember very little.
My point is, I don't remember specifically what kind of breath weapon a dragon has. I think "what do I know about red dragons".

But nobody has answered my question. If I ask "Do trolls have ranged attacks" (or whatever the proper phrasing would be) do I also know about their regen? Is it the same DC or automatic like the answer to my specific question?
 

Seramus

Explorer
Then again I've never blocked anyone. But differences of opinion? Sometimes we're going to agree sometimes we're not. If I found someone was being offensive or making personal attacks I'd report it.
I do it when some quality of a poster consistently makes the experience of reading their posts unpleasant. Like someone who types in all caps, repeatedly hates on 5E, too much pedantry, etc.
But nobody has answered my question. If I ask "Do trolls have ranged attacks" (or whatever the proper phrasing would be) do I also know about their regen? Is it the same DC or automatic like the answer to my specific question?
I am not those other posters, but I certainly would inform you about the regeneration of trolls. I mentally assign certain DC to certain information, and if the player exceeds that DC then I also provide that additional information.

Actions CAN change the DC though, but usually no more than 5. If a trap lies in the chandelier, and someone searches under the rug, I won’t auto fail someone for searching the rug. But I will increase the DC to notice the chandelier trap by 5 and let the dice determine the outcome.
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
Yeah, it’s ignoring now, not blocking. The ignored user can still see your posts, you just can’t see theirs. Which is a little annoying, but at least we no longer have the problem where if someone blocks you it screws up redirects in any thread they’ve posted in.
 

Fanaelialae

Adventurer
Sure but when it comes to lore recollection there's really not a gotya type moment.

So what if my approach is emember my life experiences and try to recall anything about trolls from those. I've been told that's to vague an approach... but is that actually a vague approach at all? It seems pretty clear and straightforward to me.
Right, but as I've mentioned I don't require much in the way of approach, just goal. "Can I use History to see if I know about X" is okay in my book. Just pointing out that specifying your approach can prevent the DM from making assumptions in that regard. For something where approach isn't especially relevant (like trying to remember something) it's not likely to be an issue.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Right, but as I've mentioned I don't require much in the way of approach, just goal. "Can I use History to see if I know about X" is okay in my book. Just pointing out that specifying your approach can prevent the DM from making assumptions in that regard. For something where approach isn't especially relevant (like trying to remember something) it's not likely to be an issue.
So can you answer the question. I ask about trolls and ranged attacks. Do I also know about regen at the same DC?

While I realize that not everyone plays the same, if asking for specific info grants you only that specific info and nothing more (or at a higher DC) then I think it's a game of 20 questions. If not, then why bother asking for specifics?
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
How exactly is the newbie supposed to know what weakness to ask about? Should he just cover all million possible weaknesses, specifically, so as he is not being to vague?
I will repeat. There is nothing wrong with learning by doing. "Look! The wound is closing"(doing). Followed by, "I draw upon the lore my grandfather taught me about his adventuring days and figure out how to prevent that from happening"(more doing). Followed by, DM: "You succeed!", "You fail!", or "Roll a d20 and let's see if you know.

And before we get more "magic words" crap, that's not even close to the only way a newbie could phrase it to find out. All without knowing a thing about the game.
 

Advertisement

Top