Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8634638" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Quite a bit, and you just don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. </p><p></p><p>Lets look at what a 4e skill check means: First, let me say that SOME 4e skill checks run into the same problem that 5e has, but most don't because the way 4e uses its skills and describes them tends to be more concrete in effect, but also less specific about what a skill actually IS. So, for instance, its quite clear what 4e swimming checks mean, you can swim for one melee round (its an athletics check). The thing is, all 4e skill check outcomes within combat are quite well-defined, they're basically 'powers' (in the compendium they actually format them literally as powers). If not, then they are governed by 'page 42', which again produces definite results, as it structures everything in terms of an attack. But this is all fairly unimportant really because the real purpose and use of skill checks is in Skill Challenges. As I stated before, that provides an intent-based framework in which each check produces a defined measure of overall success of intent. There is no ambiguity at all there, if its a simple level 3 challenge then the consequences of success or failure of a given check within that challenge is a matter of rules. I mean, the GM can spell out MORE than that (IE partial success, etc.) but any player is on firm ground when making a skill check, and can decide without reference to the GM or anything but the fiction and the state of the SC and the character, and decide whether or not something 'can work' or not.</p><p></p><p>5e skill checks simply do not partake of this character. As I say, there are a few cases where 4e checks can fall into this crack too, and the WHY is illustrative. They would be cases where a player species that their character has some sort of intent or a specific task they wish to complete, and the GM fails to frame up the action into an SC! The ranger declares that he wants to track down his friend's murderer and the GM simply asks for a single Perception check. 1st it seems like the GMing here violates the intent of 4e design, and secondly I would observe that the MERE EXISTENCE of the option to cast this as an SC actually does some good work. In a sense at this point the GM is sort of telling you its a 'Complexity 0 SC', because otherwise why only ask for this single check? But for the 5e player, the request to make this tracking check doesn't really tell him anything much at all. The GM will probably feel obliged to present a success as indicating some amount of tracking happened, but that's all we know. Heck, failure could still mean the same thing!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8634638, member: 82106"] Quite a bit, and you just don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. Lets look at what a 4e skill check means: First, let me say that SOME 4e skill checks run into the same problem that 5e has, but most don't because the way 4e uses its skills and describes them tends to be more concrete in effect, but also less specific about what a skill actually IS. So, for instance, its quite clear what 4e swimming checks mean, you can swim for one melee round (its an athletics check). The thing is, all 4e skill check outcomes within combat are quite well-defined, they're basically 'powers' (in the compendium they actually format them literally as powers). If not, then they are governed by 'page 42', which again produces definite results, as it structures everything in terms of an attack. But this is all fairly unimportant really because the real purpose and use of skill checks is in Skill Challenges. As I stated before, that provides an intent-based framework in which each check produces a defined measure of overall success of intent. There is no ambiguity at all there, if its a simple level 3 challenge then the consequences of success or failure of a given check within that challenge is a matter of rules. I mean, the GM can spell out MORE than that (IE partial success, etc.) but any player is on firm ground when making a skill check, and can decide without reference to the GM or anything but the fiction and the state of the SC and the character, and decide whether or not something 'can work' or not. 5e skill checks simply do not partake of this character. As I say, there are a few cases where 4e checks can fall into this crack too, and the WHY is illustrative. They would be cases where a player species that their character has some sort of intent or a specific task they wish to complete, and the GM fails to frame up the action into an SC! The ranger declares that he wants to track down his friend's murderer and the GM simply asks for a single Perception check. 1st it seems like the GMing here violates the intent of 4e design, and secondly I would observe that the MERE EXISTENCE of the option to cast this as an SC actually does some good work. In a sense at this point the GM is sort of telling you its a 'Complexity 0 SC', because otherwise why only ask for this single check? But for the 5e player, the request to make this tracking check doesn't really tell him anything much at all. The GM will probably feel obliged to present a success as indicating some amount of tracking happened, but that's all we know. Heck, failure could still mean the same thing! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top