Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What are your biggest immersion breakers, rules wise?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7835218" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>Its not testing knowledge with an action. It’s using an action to gain new knowledge. If it was knowledge you already had, it wouldn’t take an action, and therefore wouldn’t require a check (since checks are a tool for resolving uncertainty in the outcomes of actions.) If the structural integrity of the wall was something you should have been able to know without having to take an action to learn it (for example, if you were a dwarf with Stonecunning), I would have included that information in my description of the environment.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh, neither am I. Which is why, if a structural flaw didn’t exist, searching for one would result in not finding one would not have an uncertain outcome, and would therefore not require a check to resolve. You just fail to find any structural flaws (because none exist).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t see any meaningful difference between making a flaw that didn’t already exist as a result of a knowledge check vs. making it with the result of a search check. Either way the DM is inventing new features of the environment on the fly based on the results of checks the players are making, rather than describing the environment thoroughly and calling for checks to resolve the outcomes of actions the players describe. Either way, I’m not keen on the idea.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7835218, member: 6779196"] Its not testing knowledge with an action. It’s using an action to gain new knowledge. If it was knowledge you already had, it wouldn’t take an action, and therefore wouldn’t require a check (since checks are a tool for resolving uncertainty in the outcomes of actions.) If the structural integrity of the wall was something you should have been able to know without having to take an action to learn it (for example, if you were a dwarf with Stonecunning), I would have included that information in my description of the environment. Oh, neither am I. Which is why, if a structural flaw didn’t exist, searching for one would result in not finding one would not have an uncertain outcome, and would therefore not require a check to resolve. You just fail to find any structural flaws (because none exist). I don’t see any meaningful difference between making a flaw that didn’t already exist as a result of a knowledge check vs. making it with the result of a search check. Either way the DM is inventing new features of the environment on the fly based on the results of checks the players are making, rather than describing the environment thoroughly and calling for checks to resolve the outcomes of actions the players describe. Either way, I’m not keen on the idea. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What are your biggest immersion breakers, rules wise?
Top