Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5959178" data-attributes="member: 22779">Honestly, for me, I find fortune in the middle makes the most sense.&nbsp; Or, perhaps a better way to put it, it's the most versatile.&nbsp; If you put fortune at either end, then you can only have one explanation ever for any event.&nbsp; To me, that's not what good resolution mechanics should do.&nbsp; Good resolution mechanics should never dictate the fiction beforehand.And, really, in my mind, D&amp;D has always worked like this.&nbsp; At least mostly.&nbsp; You state an intent, you roll the dice, you get to the next step and roll the dice again to determine the outcome of that event.&nbsp; That's how combat has always worked.&nbsp; I can state, &quot;I am going to stab him as hard as I can&quot; all you like, but, until damage is rolled, you cannot really, with any certainty, say that that is what's going to happen.In any skill check, you state your intent, then roll to actually attempt whatever it is you are trying to do.&nbsp; And that die roll determines your level of success.&nbsp; Frequently it doesn't even determine the entire event.&nbsp; A climb skill check only allows you to move a certain speed up the wall. If you haven't reached the top, you need to check again to continue climbing and it's the dice that determine your actions, not any statement by the player.So, no, I don't want the mechanics to say, absolutely, one way or the other.&nbsp; If HP=Meat then you must resolve and narrate everything, one specific way.&nbsp; If HP=Plot Protection, you must narrate everything in one specific way.&nbsp; By leaving it vague and saying, &quot;pick whichever you like and the table likes&quot; you get the most flexiblity.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5959178, member: 22779"] Honestly, for me, I find fortune in the middle makes the most sense. Or, perhaps a better way to put it, it's the most versatile. If you put fortune at either end, then you can only have one explanation ever for any event. To me, that's not what good resolution mechanics should do. Good resolution mechanics should never dictate the fiction beforehand. And, really, in my mind, D&D has always worked like this. At least mostly. You state an intent, you roll the dice, you get to the next step and roll the dice again to determine the outcome of that event. That's how combat has always worked. I can state, "I am going to stab him as hard as I can" all you like, but, until damage is rolled, you cannot really, with any certainty, say that that is what's going to happen. In any skill check, you state your intent, then roll to actually attempt whatever it is you are trying to do. And that die roll determines your level of success. Frequently it doesn't even determine the entire event. A climb skill check only allows you to move a certain speed up the wall. If you haven't reached the top, you need to check again to continue climbing and it's the dice that determine your actions, not any statement by the player. So, no, I don't want the mechanics to say, absolutely, one way or the other. If HP=Meat then you must resolve and narrate everything, one specific way. If HP=Plot Protection, you must narrate everything in one specific way. By leaving it vague and saying, "pick whichever you like and the table likes" you get the most flexiblity. [/QUOTE]

Verification