Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8633702" data-attributes="member: 82106">Mostly this is one of the biggest issues. 5e doesn't have a non-combat resolution system, at all, in effect. It has a 'color generation' system. That is, first the GM sets the DC of every task, and only with reference to the specific fiction engaged by that action, and then there's no 'valance' to whatever results from the check. So non-combat resolution in 5e is utterly toothless. It actually means nothing to pass a check in 5e (unless it is an attack roll or a saving throw in combat). 5e doesn't even really tell the GM what the meaning of passing/failing a check should mean in any terms which matter WRT the character's goals at all. So the means doesn't even technically exist for a player to engage some sort of concern they have at a mechanical system level. Is it possible for the GM to draw out a (mental perhaps) map of what successes mean in a specific context, communicate that to the player (so they can assess the stakes and thus truly engage the character's need/consideration) and then honor that. The result would look HELLA lot like a 4e SC! That is in fact exactly what the SC mechanism of 4e does for the game's participants. It says &quot;Oh, you, player, you need to get N successes here before 3 failures to achieve your goal, and the checks will come out of skills X, Y, and Z, and they will be level Q, and R of them will be hard checks.&quot; It also says that there is a contract here that requires the GM to honor success with the same faithfulness they would for a combat situation. Yes, you can certainly have Story Now happen without a formal way to do all the above, but everyone had better know how to make that work. Basically Story Now 5e requires rewriting a bunch of the game in a fairly thorough way, even if only informally.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8633702, member: 82106"] Mostly this is one of the biggest issues. 5e doesn't have a non-combat resolution system, at all, in effect. It has a 'color generation' system. That is, first the GM sets the DC of every task, and only with reference to the specific fiction engaged by that action, and then there's no 'valance' to whatever results from the check. So non-combat resolution in 5e is [B]utterly toothless. [/B]It actually means nothing to pass a check in 5e (unless it is an attack roll or a saving throw in combat). 5e doesn't even really tell the GM what the meaning of passing/failing a check should mean in any terms which matter WRT the character's goals at all. So the means doesn't even technically exist for a player to engage some sort of concern they have at a mechanical system level. Is it possible for the GM to draw out a (mental perhaps) map of what successes mean in a specific context, communicate that to the player (so they can assess the stakes and thus truly engage the character's need/consideration) and then honor that. The result would look HELLA lot like a 4e SC! That is in fact exactly what the SC mechanism of 4e does for the game's participants. It says "Oh, you, player, you need to get N successes here before 3 failures to achieve your goal, and the checks will come out of skills X, Y, and Z, and they will be level Q, and R of them will be hard checks." It also says that there is a contract here that requires the GM to honor success with the same faithfulness they would for a combat situation. Yes, you can certainly have Story Now happen without a formal way to do all the above, but everyone had better know how to make that work. Basically Story Now 5e requires rewriting a bunch of the game in a fairly thorough way, even if only informally. [/QUOTE]

Verification