Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8005018" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>In fact, very specifically, if you are using mechanical resolution, you are supposed to inform the players of the stakes. That indication is doing exactly that - the players are informed that their life and liberty may be at stake. So, they already know what can happen if they choose poorly.</p><p></p><p>They chose poorly. In effect, they tried an intimidate check that the GM determined was not possible for them to succeed at - well within the GM's rights in mechanical resolution systems.</p><p></p><p>So, by the basics of mechanical resolution, we know something bad is going to happen to the PCs. This whole discussion is over exactly which bad thing the GM will choose to apply - it isn't like mechanical resolution would say, in detail, "He throws them in the stocks," or, "He has them flogged," or, "He has them executed at dawn." A mechanical resolution would typically say, "They failed badly. <em>Figure out what that reasonably means in your fiction</em>."</p><p></p><p>This entire discussion seems really to be about that last step, while several of you are arguing several steps prior.</p><p></p><p>Edit to add: I can totally see this scene happenign just as described in a Fate game that had a social stress track - in which this is certainly a mechanical determination. The PCs enter a conflict, start to lose. Two of them concede (and negotiate a retreat, failing to get what htey want, but get away with their lives), the other two get Taken Out. This specifically and explicitly gives their opposition the choice of what ultimately happens to them - they can die, or not. GM's choice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 8005018, member: 177"] In fact, very specifically, if you are using mechanical resolution, you are supposed to inform the players of the stakes. That indication is doing exactly that - the players are informed that their life and liberty may be at stake. So, they already know what can happen if they choose poorly. They chose poorly. In effect, they tried an intimidate check that the GM determined was not possible for them to succeed at - well within the GM's rights in mechanical resolution systems. So, by the basics of mechanical resolution, we know something bad is going to happen to the PCs. This whole discussion is over exactly which bad thing the GM will choose to apply - it isn't like mechanical resolution would say, in detail, "He throws them in the stocks," or, "He has them flogged," or, "He has them executed at dawn." A mechanical resolution would typically say, "They failed badly. [I]Figure out what that reasonably means in your fiction[/I]." This entire discussion seems really to be about that last step, while several of you are arguing several steps prior. Edit to add: I can totally see this scene happenign just as described in a Fate game that had a social stress track - in which this is certainly a mechanical determination. The PCs enter a conflict, start to lose. Two of them concede (and negotiate a retreat, failing to get what htey want, but get away with their lives), the other two get Taken Out. This specifically and explicitly gives their opposition the choice of what ultimately happens to them - they can die, or not. GM's choice. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay
Top