Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6844909" data-attributes="member: 97077">I'm not sure what you mean with regard to primacy or impartial resolution. The DM is expected to be impartial when applying the rules, but since the DM decides when the rules are applied, this isn't really an issue as no player is being "impaired" as you suggest - the rules aren't in play.I realize that how I do things in this regard isn't the standard and I'm not shocked when I see others behaving otherwise. I still think it's awful though. I used to play that way and I won't go back.For the record, players are welcome to have their characters have competing goals and conflicts. The way we do things ensures that the conflicts which arise during play are of mutual interest to the players involved.Let me clarify what I meant: If you decide ahead of time that a given obstacle requires a check to get past (e.g. this puzzle requires a DC 15 Intelligence check to solve), that's done without reference to the decisions the players make to overcome said obstacle.In the example under discussion, the player described his or her character as turning a dial to "S." What is in doubt about turning the dial that calls for an Intelligence check in your view?Well, did I?</blockquote>