Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9678316" data-attributes="member: 29398">In the fiction, sure.In terms of rules-based action resolution, however, the 'why' is irrelevant.&nbsp; You could be climbing that cliff for any of a thousand different reasons but for the purpose of resolving whether you succeed or fail on the climb, none of them matter in the slightest.Same goes for combat.&nbsp; Why you're trying to defeat your foe is utterly irrelevant to whether your to-hit roll this round succeeds or fails.Game-based abstractions such as climbing checks or to-hit rolls don't care about the why, only about the what.&nbsp; It's on us as players and DMs to turn the abstractions into coherent fiction, and that's where the 'why' piece can come in.There's also the question of dealing with things in discrete time-sequenced steps.&quot;I climb the cliff in order to save my friend&quot; is in fact multiple action declarations concatenated into one, and needs to be split out and sequentialized.1. &quot;I climb the cliff&quot;.&nbsp; Great, let's resolve that; after which you're either at the top of the cliff or you're not.2. &quot;I save my friend&quot;.&nbsp; I'll want a lot more detail on just what you're doing to accomplish this, but it won't matter until you're up the cliff (see step 1) and can get to your friend.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9678316, member: 29398"] In the fiction, sure. In terms of rules-based action resolution, however, the 'why' is irrelevant. You could be climbing that cliff for any of a thousand different reasons but for the purpose of resolving whether you succeed or fail on the climb, none of them matter in the slightest. Same goes for combat. [I]Why[/I] you're trying to defeat your foe is utterly irrelevant to whether your to-hit roll this round succeeds or fails. Game-based abstractions such as climbing checks or to-hit rolls don't care about the why, only about the what. It's on us as players and DMs to turn the abstractions into coherent fiction, and that's where the 'why' piece can come in. There's also the question of dealing with things in discrete time-sequenced steps. "I climb the cliff in order to save my friend" is in fact multiple action declarations concatenated into one, and needs to be split out and sequentialized. 1. "I climb the cliff". Great, let's resolve that; after which you're either at the top of the cliff or you're not. 2. "I save my friend". I'll want a lot more detail on just what you're doing to accomplish this, but it won't matter until you're up the cliff (see step 1) and can get to your friend. [/QUOTE]

Verification