Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 7585022" data-attributes="member: 6921763">Let me finish the quote of mine that you truncated... if a player saying they want their PC to climb the tower most of the way to get a good look around before summitting isn't an action and a goal, then I'm not sure what is.&nbsp; And perhaps that doesn't even matter because our job, as DMs, is not to tell the player what their actions and goals should be, it's to adjudicate them in the context of the scene.&nbsp; If the action and/or goal seem incomplete, of course the DM can - and should - prod for more.&nbsp; Clarity is at the heart of this playstyle.&nbsp; And please let's not mistake clarity for &quot;magic words&quot; as has been bandied about before.As this is the D&amp;D 5th Edition forum, of course we can assume it is a 5e game.&nbsp; Again, it is up to the player to describe their action and goal so there is no confusion - and the DM to prompt them if it is unclear.&nbsp; In combat, there is lots of short-hand going on.&nbsp; Attack rolls can assumed most of the time, not called for by the DM.&nbsp; Killing blows are assumed most of the time, so clarification is not necessary.&nbsp; It's the players responsibility to declare the desire for a knock out sometime during the combat - it's not on the DM to suggest courses of action for the PC in combat, or any other time, really.&nbsp; So, yeah, no awkward moment unless the player doesn't say how this attack is different.&nbsp; Keep in mind, we're not looking to set up &quot;gotchas&quot;, we're looking for fluidity in game play and everyone at the table contributes to that.&nbsp; If a player retroactively says &quot;Oh, I meant to knock it out not kill it&quot; since they forgot to state the goal, well that's fine, it's just not fluid.&nbsp; This playstyle isn't about being a jerk DM as some like to paint it as.The DM is in charge of narrating the results of the adventurers' actions - and as part of that, the DM can elect to have the player narrate instead, as in the case of taking down a foe.&nbsp; I don't see where this is prescribed that the DM must ask the player &quot;how do you want to do this&quot; after a successful blow that brings a monster to 0 HP - but perhaps I missed it and you can point it out.&nbsp; Regardless, it can get old if you are asking the same player how they used their sword differently this time to take down the 5th orc they've killed in the battle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 7585022, member: 6921763"] Let me finish the quote of mine that you truncated... if a player saying they want their PC to climb the tower most of the way to get a good look around before summitting isn't an action and a goal, then I'm not sure what is. And perhaps that doesn't even matter because our job, as DMs, is not to tell the player what their actions and goals should be, it's to adjudicate them in the context of the scene. If the action and/or goal seem incomplete, of course the DM can - and should - prod for more. Clarity is at the heart of this playstyle. And please let's not mistake clarity for "magic words" as has been bandied about before. As this is the D&D 5th Edition forum, of course we can assume it is a 5e game. Again, it is up to the player to describe their action and goal so there is no confusion - and the DM to prompt them if it is unclear. In combat, there is lots of short-hand going on. Attack rolls can assumed most of the time, not called for by the DM. Killing blows are assumed most of the time, so clarification is not necessary. It's the players responsibility to declare the desire for a knock out sometime during the combat - it's not on the DM to suggest courses of action for the PC in combat, or any other time, really. So, yeah, no awkward moment unless the player doesn't say how this attack is different. Keep in mind, we're not looking to set up "gotchas", we're looking for fluidity in game play and everyone at the table contributes to that. If a player retroactively says "Oh, I meant to knock it out not kill it" since they forgot to state the goal, well that's fine, it's just not fluid. This playstyle isn't about being a jerk DM as some like to paint it as. The DM is in charge of narrating the results of the adventurers' actions - and as part of that, the DM can elect to have the player narrate instead, as in the case of taking down a foe. I don't see where this is prescribed that the DM must ask the player "how do you want to do this" after a successful blow that brings a monster to 0 HP - but perhaps I missed it and you can point it out. Regardless, it can get old if you are asking the same player how they used their sword differently this time to take down the 5th orc they've killed in the battle. [/QUOTE]

Verification