Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Separating challenge and complexity in monster design
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7016006" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I think the default in 5e is not to ask for an Acrobatics check but a DEX check, to which Acrobatics training might then apply.</p><p></p><p>As to who asks: the player or the GM? The issue of auto-success or not is (in my view) neither here nor there - if a player in my 4e game or BW game says "I want to use my [such-and-such skill/ability] to do [such-and-such]" and there's nothing at stake and hence I as GM want to just say "yes", then I say yes. In 4e this means no d20 is rolled; in BW this means no dice are rolled and no check is logged for advancement (in BW, the player who wants the check therefore has an incentive to push his/her PC into situations where something is at stake).</p><p></p><p>I think it is more about [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION]'s "basic conversation of the game". Are players expected to speak simply in character, describing their actions in "naturalistic" terms? I think the rulebook suggests so. Personally I feel this can give magic-users something of an advantage, as they can "naturalistically" talk about using their spells, which give them discrete and pre-established packets of effect defined in mechanical as well as "naturalistic" terms; whereas the martial types have to declare mechancially "blind", as it were, and then find out how it will be adjudicated.</p><p></p><p>At many tables I think this also generates some pressure on players of martial PCs to shift the focus of play to a domain where they can wheel out their own pre-determined packets of effects, namely, combat (with its action economy, damage rules, etc). Like "I cast a Charm Person spell", "I attack with my sword" is not just a contribution to the basic conversation of the game but also a mechanically significant move that invokes its own distinct resolution procedures over which the player has at least a modicum of control, via PC build plus the details of the action declaration.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7016006, member: 42582"] I think the default in 5e is not to ask for an Acrobatics check but a DEX check, to which Acrobatics training might then apply. As to who asks: the player or the GM? The issue of auto-success or not is (in my view) neither here nor there - if a player in my 4e game or BW game says "I want to use my [such-and-such skill/ability] to do [such-and-such]" and there's nothing at stake and hence I as GM want to just say "yes", then I say yes. In 4e this means no d20 is rolled; in BW this means no dice are rolled and no check is logged for advancement (in BW, the player who wants the check therefore has an incentive to push his/her PC into situations where something is at stake). I think it is more about [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION]'s "basic conversation of the game". Are players expected to speak simply in character, describing their actions in "naturalistic" terms? I think the rulebook suggests so. Personally I feel this can give magic-users something of an advantage, as they can "naturalistically" talk about using their spells, which give them discrete and pre-established packets of effect defined in mechanical as well as "naturalistic" terms; whereas the martial types have to declare mechancially "blind", as it were, and then find out how it will be adjudicated. At many tables I think this also generates some pressure on players of martial PCs to shift the focus of play to a domain where they can wheel out their own pre-determined packets of effects, namely, combat (with its action economy, damage rules, etc). Like "I cast a Charm Person spell", "I attack with my sword" is not just a contribution to the basic conversation of the game but also a mechanically significant move that invokes its own distinct resolution procedures over which the player has at least a modicum of control, via PC build plus the details of the action declaration. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Separating challenge and complexity in monster design
Top