Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Storm-Bringer" data-source="post: 4170518" data-attributes="member: 57832">When you exclude the middle ground, that doesn't mean there isn't one.Option A is pretty much how the system has been presented, with the 'say yes' design philosophy.&nbsp; Clearly, that leads to absurd situations.&nbsp; The suggested solution, ie option B, with DMs deciding what skills are appropriate, isn't any different than how things are done now, except for the meta-game tally.Between those two, we have 'flexibility'.&nbsp; The DM sets up a situation, say a poison bomb in a corpse, and hangs it in a tree.&nbsp; That same DM knows why it is in the tree, and what will set off or defuse it, in general terms.&nbsp; At that point, when the players interact with it, there will be a general course for getting from point A to point B.&nbsp; If the Rogue wants to climb the tree, the Wizard on the ground doesn't get to progress the plot with a Spot check (&quot;You see a corpse in a tree next to the Rogue.&nbsp; Next.&quot;)&nbsp; But the player of the Rogue can ask &quot;What do I see?&quot;, at which point the DM describes the corpse, possibly making a secret Spot check.&nbsp; With the more pointed question, &quot;Do I see anything unusual about the corpse?&quot;, the player may get to roll the Spot check, maybe with a bonus, or the DM uses the result of the prior check.&nbsp; The Rogue shouts down, &quot;It looks like someone cut it open and sewed it back up&quot;.&nbsp; Being an unusual detail, the Cleric makes a Knowledge (Religion) check with a bonus and can't recall any society that hangs a corpse in a tree as a standard burial rite, and certainly not one that would cut a body open and sew it back up first.&nbsp; All this messing around catches the attention of the Dryad, at which point the Ranger calls upon his Nature skills to talk to the Dryad.&nbsp; She is unaware of when the corpse was hung there, but it wasn't there yesterday.&nbsp; Further conversation reveals her enmity with a black satyr in the area.&nbsp; &quot;Well,&quot; the PCs decide, &quot;hanging the corpse in the tree could be a warning, but cutting it open and sewing it back together serves little purpose.&quot;&nbsp; They decide the Rogue should carefully cut it down and lower it from the tree.&nbsp; The Rogue goes about cutting some of the rope, but being extended on the limb a bit, fails a Dex check and tumbles out of the tree, bumping the corpse.&nbsp; It is still held up by most of the rope, but the incision splits a little, and some yellowish gas escapes.&nbsp; The party is certain that any further rough handling will set it off.&nbsp; The Wizard employs Rope Use to instruct the others in supporting the corpse so it doesn't fall when it is removed from the tree.&nbsp; Further checks ensue.&nbsp; Possibly with skills that have been determined to be 'useless' by most people.So, it progresses logically, and we don't get a nonsensical outcome likeWhile it is one group's interpretation, we see that once the challenge is won, nothing further they do in regards to that situation matters.&nbsp; The can swing the corpse around by the heels and toss it at each other.&nbsp; The original example was solved mostly by talking and looking.&nbsp; In essence, they bored the trap into disarming itself.So, you tell me which one is more enjoyable.&nbsp; The players figuring it out one step at a time, or the players rolling dice to see if they are allowed to figure it out.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Storm-Bringer, post: 4170518, member: 57832"] When you exclude the middle ground, that doesn't mean there isn't one. Option A is pretty much how the system has been presented, with the 'say yes' design philosophy. Clearly, that leads to absurd situations. The suggested solution, ie option B, with DMs deciding what skills are appropriate, isn't any different than how things are done now, except for the meta-game tally. Between those two, we have 'flexibility'. The DM sets up a situation, say a poison bomb in a corpse, and hangs it in a tree. That same DM knows why it is in the tree, and what will set off or defuse it, in general terms. At that point, when the players interact with it, there will be a general course for getting from point A to point B. If the Rogue wants to climb the tree, the Wizard on the ground doesn't get to progress the plot with a Spot check ("You see a corpse in a tree next to the Rogue. Next.") But the player of the Rogue can ask "What do I see?", at which point the DM describes the corpse, possibly making a secret Spot check. With the more pointed question, "Do I see anything unusual about the corpse?", the player may get to roll the Spot check, maybe with a bonus, or the DM uses the result of the prior check. The Rogue shouts down, "It looks like someone cut it open and sewed it back up". Being an unusual detail, the Cleric makes a Knowledge (Religion) check with a bonus and can't recall any society that hangs a corpse in a tree as a standard burial rite, and certainly not one that would cut a body open and sew it back up first. All this messing around catches the attention of the Dryad, at which point the Ranger calls upon his Nature skills to talk to the Dryad. She is unaware of when the corpse was hung there, but it wasn't there yesterday. Further conversation reveals her enmity with a black satyr in the area. "Well," the PCs decide, "hanging the corpse in the tree could be a warning, but cutting it open and sewing it back together serves little purpose." They decide the Rogue should carefully cut it down and lower it from the tree. The Rogue goes about cutting some of the rope, but being extended on the limb a bit, fails a Dex check and tumbles out of the tree, bumping the corpse. It is still held up by most of the rope, but the incision splits a little, and some yellowish gas escapes. The party is certain that any further rough handling will set it off. The Wizard employs Rope Use to instruct the others in supporting the corpse so it doesn't fall when it is removed from the tree. Further checks ensue. Possibly with skills that have been determined to be 'useless' by most people. So, it progresses logically, and we don't get a nonsensical outcome like While it is one group's interpretation, we see that once the challenge is won, nothing further they do in regards to that situation matters. The can swing the corpse around by the heels and toss it at each other. The original example was solved mostly by talking and looking. In essence, they [i]bored the trap into disarming itself[/i]. So, you tell me which one is more enjoyable. The players figuring it out one step at a time, or the players rolling dice to see if they are allowed to figure it out. [/QUOTE]

Verification