Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9527617" data-attributes="member: 29398">Quite the opposite: it's placing importance on the fiction and how the mechanics reflect it in sequential time.Person with Intuitive Dodge (our new hypothetical ability for the day) senses an attack coming and decides this would be a good time to use that ability.  The attack then happens, and regardless of the roll (which is still made to allow for the possibility of fumbles etc.) it auto-misses.  This all flows sequentially in time both in the fiction and at the table, and the mechanics directly match the fiction.  Good.Contrast this with our Intuitive Dodge person getting hit by an attack and only then deciding that would have been a good time to have used Intuitive Dodge; the ability is invoked, and a hit turns to a miss.  This doesn't flow sequentially in time at the table, as time gets reversed such that what was a successful attack becomes a miss; nor does it flow sequentially in the fiction as the fiction is being retroactively changed.  Bad.First off, I'm not talking about "declaring actions" as such, I'm talking about (what should be freeform) roleplay leading either to a resolution or a stalemate, depending on how that roleplay turns out.Put another way, ideally the player never says "I'm trying to persuade the Duke" before or during the process of doing so, unless it's an in-character whispered aside to someone (be it PC or NPC) not sure what's going on.  Instead, the player just launches into whatever persuasive arguments come to mind and things develop organically from there as the DM responds in-character as the Duke (and-or any other NPCs who might be involved).</blockquote>

Verification