Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bawylie" data-source="post: 7585092" data-attributes="member: 6776133">Alright, but it doesn’t clearly state that players declare their actions. It states, “the players describe what they want to do.” That’s PH 181. I don’t feel a semantics argument is worthwhile, but if the argument is “it doesn’t say GOALS” anywhere, you have to concede it also doesn’t say DECLARE ACTIONS anywhere either. That leaves us with “what they want to do.” I think you’d agree with me that the players should mentally put themselves in their characters’ shoes/perspective and decide on a course of action that seems best to that character. Whether that course of action is straightforward (kill a goblin) or broad (get into the guarded tower), the player must necessarily say out loud what they want to do. We can’t really play unless they do. Now if what they want to do IS straightforward, I think we all agree that’s sufficient. DM can set a DC if they feel that’s warranted for the situation, or rely on the goblin’s AC or whatever. The player rolls, and we determine the outcome of the action. But the sticky tricky bit is that “what the player wants to do” is not always one action. “Get into the guarded tower” is not a declared action. And it’s not sufficient for play. It’s great that you want to get it in, but a piece is missing. Take the opposite approach. “I want to sneak.” Well, cool, more power to you. But that’s also not quite sufficient. Where do you want to go? Who do you sneak past? Even if you do creep up the main road that the guards are watching, you’ll be spotted. I think a fair DM here might pause and ask for some clarification. Now “I want to sneak into the guarded tower” is essentially as good as “I want to kill the goblin.” It’s light on details but at least we have some idea what the player wants to do, and the action by which that player makes “what they want to do” happen. That’s something we can adjudicate. We can go further, and clarify “by spell or by weapon?” “Sneak up the wall or through the back?” And that may affect how hard the action is. Anyway, for my games, I ask that the players tell me “what they want to do” and add “how they want to do it” which almost always includes an action. Leaving the semantics bit aside, “intent and approach” is functionally the same as “goal and action” or “what and how” or “plan and execution.” And I believe it’s a best practice to make sure DM and player are on the same page before dice get rolled. “Players describe what they want to do” is helpfully broad enough to glide over straightforward stuff, but also leaves plenty of room for the DM to say “hang on a sec, how’s that work?” where what they want isn’t reasonably clear or straightforward at all. “I’ll just tell the guard we have business here.” Plainly the goal is to bypass the guard. But is this a deception? Persuasion? An intimidation? Or a distraction for something else? Knowing that helps me know what ability score applies, what skill might apply, and what DC to set. Not knowing that, I may not have sufficient info to set a fair DC. I want to be fair to my players.  So the HOW matters as much as the WHAT. Or, the goal matters as much as the action.</blockquote>

Verification