Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6863701" data-attributes="member: 42582">Well, upthread you expressed objections to, or concerns about, my use of the words &quot;might&quot; and &quot;probably&quot; in setting out scenarios in which different descriptors could have different consequences for resolution. So I thought the use of the same words, in the same context, in the 5e rules might similarly perturb you.Your description of how ability checks work in 5e - including your presentation as the system being one of primarily skill checks rather than ability checks - is different from how I read the rules. It's even different from how I run 4e's skill system, which I would tend to treat as a bit more regimented than 5e's ability check system.You would use it whenever the outcome of an action declaration would depend on how charming your PC is - much as, in 5e, you would make a CHA check whenever the outcome of an action would depend on your PC's force of personality or eloquence.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6863701, member: 42582"] Well, upthread you expressed objections to, or concerns about, my use of the words "might" and "probably" in setting out scenarios in which different descriptors could have different consequences for resolution. So I thought the use of the same words, in the same context, in the 5e rules might similarly perturb you. Your description of how ability checks work in 5e - including your presentation as the system being one of primarily [I]skill[/I] checks rather than ability checks - is different from how I read the rules. It's even different from how I run 4e's skill system, which I would tend to treat as a bit more regimented than 5e's ability check system. You would use it whenever the outcome of an action declaration would depend on how charming your PC is - much as, in 5e, you would make a CHA check whenever the outcome of an action would depend on your PC's force of personality or eloquence. [/QUOTE]

Verification