Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nullzone" data-source="post: 5369379" data-attributes="member: 97538">Hi there, I had a DM recently that did something interesting that I thought I might pick the brains of the collective wisdom here about.This DM has an interesting rule that I'm waffling about incorporating myself: skill rolls are all done by him, behind his screen; we just provide our check bonus to the particular skill we're trying to use, and then he narrates the result.I'm still on the fence about it; on the one hand, it allows a potentially better narrative for skill actions in general, since the DM can fudge a failure for a skill action he otherwise thinks is prohibited rather than telling the player No, and also prevents reverse engineering the DCs by watching the die results, which is too meta and breaks immersion for the less math-headed players who really like to imagine the scene...but on the other I can't shake the feeling that it's taking something away from the player that they should get to have control of, though I'm not really sure why I feel that way.So my question is, is this worth doing? Would any of you do it or object to having such a rule at the table? Do you think it would streamline or encumber the game in any particular ways?Thanks for reading; thoughts and input (especially from the other side of the screen!) are appreciated. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nullzone, post: 5369379, member: 97538"] Hi there, I had a DM recently that did something interesting that I thought I might pick the brains of the collective wisdom here about. This DM has an interesting rule that I'm waffling about incorporating myself: skill rolls are all done by him, behind his screen; we just provide our check bonus to the particular skill we're trying to use, and then he narrates the result. I'm still on the fence about it; on the one hand, it allows a potentially better narrative for skill actions in general, since the DM can fudge a failure for a skill action he otherwise thinks is prohibited rather than telling the player No, and also prevents reverse engineering the DCs by watching the die results, which is too meta and breaks immersion for the less math-headed players who really like to imagine the scene...but on the other I can't shake the feeling that it's taking something away from the player that they should get to have control of, though I'm not really sure why I feel that way. So my question is, is this worth doing? Would any of you do it or object to having such a rule at the table? Do you think it would streamline or encumber the game in any particular ways? Thanks for reading; thoughts and input (especially from the other side of the screen!) are appreciated. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification