Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7794397" data-attributes="member: 97077">What you established is insufficiently vague for adjudication in my view. It's like saying "I grapple the orc..." when there are 8 orcs surrounding your character. Which orc? Or, in the case of your offer, which life experiences are relevant to what you're trying to recall?I'm not sure what you mean by "readable." It's really more about being on the same page with the player as to what the character is trying to achieve and how so I can adjudicate fairly. This reduces misunderstandings and unfairness. I'll add to this below.If a player describes what they want to do and it's too vague to adjudicate in my estimation, then I'll just ask for clarification. The goal is to work toward not having to do that though. Or not do it very often.But please note that I already covered where you could derive approaches for recalling lore - Chapter 7 of the PHB. So it's not like it's a great mystery and is available to anyone who has access to the Basic Rules. If a player has read that chapter or goes back to cross-reference it, what actions sometimes get what ability checks is all spelled out. I mentioned this to both you and Hussar upthread.I don't see any cons in this approach. It's simple and accessible and mitigates misunderstandings and unfairness. The only people who don't find it simple is adults who are used to asking to make ability checks. Old dogs, new tricks and all that. Kids and players new to RPGs seem to have no issue.It also gets the player thinking about not rolling that fickle d20 if he or can avoid it and treating skill proficiency investment as insurance rather than a button to push. It also plays into the "middle path" method (DMG, p. 236) wherein the DM "can encourage your players to strike a balance between relying on bonuses and abilities and paying attention to the game and immersing themselves in its world."And as far as your approach for handling this as a DM goes - if that's what you mean - I don't actually know what it is. I only know that you've given an example of a player describing what he or she wants to do in the context of my approach and I've told you that to me it is insufficiently vague. It has the look of someone trying to pay lip service to the requirement of stating a reasonably specific approach rather than someone who embraced it as an opportunity to expound upon the character's background while seeking additional information or verification of the player's assumption.Thanks for answering my questions in any case. I appreciate it.</blockquote>

Verification