Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8647883" data-attributes="member: 71699">Okay, I see a possible missing piece here. Why have the players chosen to open that safe? We're here, why? Unless I picture the party going about opening random safes, the desired consequence - find what you were looking for in the safe - is what is resolved.I've read a few posters stopping short at the primer or the PHB text. They don't seem familiar with the whole Core. I'll try and find a way to rewrite that so it doesn't feel pandering. What I want is to point out that stopping short.[EDIT To answer your question, yes I would. When I first started running 5e I grasped ability checks as task resolution and focused on uncertainty. Over time, experiences in play and the insights and challenges of others here and elsewhere, brought me to grasp the whole core rules for ability checks and I saw what was possible. Suppose I'd stoped at the PHB. The meaningful consequences rule isn't there, so I would have stopped at checking for uncertainty.]Beyond whatever events kicked off play in session 1, DM does not decide if there is a situation: that's up to the group. Consequences are known - due to player choices and big picture elements - going in. DM doesn't choose stakes, they're chosen by the group.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8647883, member: 71699"] Okay, I see a possible missing piece here. Why have the players chosen to open that safe? We're here, why? Unless I picture the party going about opening random safes, the desired consequence - [I]find what you were looking for in the safe[/I] - is what is resolved. I've read a few posters stopping short at the primer or the PHB text. They don't seem familiar with the whole Core. I'll try and find a way to rewrite that so it doesn't feel pandering. What I want is to point out that stopping short. [EDIT To answer your question, yes I would. When I first started running 5e I grasped ability checks as task resolution and focused on uncertainty. Over time, experiences in play and the insights and challenges of others here and elsewhere, brought me to grasp the whole core rules for ability checks and I saw what was possible. Suppose I'd stoped at the PHB. The [I]meaningful consequences[/I] rule isn't there, so I would have stopped at checking for uncertainty.] Beyond whatever events kicked off play in session 1, DM does not decide if there is a situation: that's up to the group. Consequences are known - due to player choices and big picture elements - going in. DM doesn't choose stakes, they're chosen by the group. [/QUOTE]

Verification