Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8486675" data-attributes="member: 6921763">It does correlate exactly.&nbsp; If an ability check is called for, they are more likely to succeed at it.&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; Could be.I don't need to &quot;permit&quot; anything.&nbsp; The players are free to declare any action they like for their PC in whatever way they feel comfortable.&nbsp; I'll adjudicate accordingly.&nbsp; Or are you saying the permission is then in the adjudication?&nbsp; I guess, insofar as adjudication success is permission and failure is lack thereof.&nbsp; Speaking as one's PC is great, but not a requirement to play or succeed at our table.If the player wanted to invoke Shakespeare or Churchill quotes in their speech, that's great.&nbsp;&nbsp; If another player wanted to describe 3rd person how their PC &quot;gives a rousing speech complete with Shakespeare quotes&quot;.&nbsp; Hey, that works, too.&nbsp; DC is going to be the same as they described exactly the same thing in the game world.&nbsp; Actual real world knowledge is optional at the table.I'm not following you here.&nbsp; It is obvious at our table because I don't play favorites to word-smiths.&nbsp; Does that make more sense?I never played 4e so couldn't say.&nbsp; Again, real world knowledge is optional at our table.&nbsp; Just be specific (i.e. not vague) with your action declaration so I have something to adjudicate.Probably?&nbsp; I haven't played other RPGs (except for Pathfinder for a few sessions... but I don't like to talk about that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :P"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />) and you don't play 5e, so here we are.Sure, that's part of the art of DMing 5e.&nbsp; Determining how to adjudicate fairly in the moment backed by the rules (and guidance!) in the books.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8486675, member: 6921763"] It does correlate exactly. If an ability check is called for, they are more likely to succeed at it. Sure. Could be. I don't need to "permit" anything. The players are free to declare any action they like for their PC in whatever way they feel comfortable. I'll adjudicate accordingly. Or are you saying the permission is then in the adjudication? I guess, insofar as adjudication success is permission and failure is lack thereof. Speaking as one's PC is great, but not a requirement to play or succeed at our table. If the player wanted to invoke Shakespeare or Churchill quotes in their speech, that's great. If another player wanted to describe 3rd person how their PC "gives a rousing speech complete with Shakespeare quotes". Hey, that works, too. DC is going to be the same as they described exactly the same thing in the game world. Actual real world knowledge is optional at the table. I'm not following you here. It is obvious at our table because I don't play favorites to word-smiths. Does that make more sense? I never played 4e so couldn't say. Again, real world knowledge is optional at our table. Just be specific (i.e. not vague) with your action declaration so I have something to adjudicate. Probably? I haven't played other RPGs (except for Pathfinder for a few sessions... but I don't like to talk about that :P) and you don't play 5e, so here we are. Sure, that's part of the art of DMing 5e. Determining how to adjudicate fairly in the moment backed by the rules (and guidance!) in the books. [/QUOTE]

Verification