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 DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
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="Imaculata" data-source="post: 7504638" data-attributes="member: 6801286"><p>So you never describe a room that has furniture in it? Because details about a room that aren't necessarily important for gameplay do occur plenty of times in my experience. Now, I tend to draw attention to the things that are really important, but a room can also contain things that aren't. And nothing is stopping the players from investigating those details.</p><p></p><p>But you can also use other examples. What if the players want to interrogate a prisoner who is willing to give them information, and does not need to be intimidated? Auto-success if they press him for information, right?</p><p></p><p>What if the players want to stealth past a bunch of knocked out drunk guards? Again, might be considered an auto-success, no roll required.</p><p></p><p>Or what if auto-fail is guaranteed? What if the players are trying to convince a guard that they didn't commit a crime, that the guard watched them do? I'd say no roll is going to convince that guard otherwise, even if they roll super high. </p><p></p><p>I think it is preferable that the players simply state what they want to do, and how they do it, instead of auto-rolling. Then I don't have to presume how they perform their action, or constantly have to ask them to clarify. And if a different roll is needed than the one they would presume, then we also dodge that problem as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh come on, you know that is not what we're advocating for. All we ask for is that a player states their action and approach. That is a pretty basic standard for communication. All a player has to say is "<em>I search the pile of rubble with my shovel</em>" or "<em>I put on gloves and carefully search the pile of rubble</em>". Any detail will help us as DM to determine if there are complications in what you are trying to do.</p><p></p><p>But hey, maybe the following example will clarify things:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Now consider the alternative:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is what I take issue with. I want to get my players out of this habit of focusing on rolls, and engage more with the fiction. This also avoids a situation where I want a different check.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What if instead there is something under the pile of rubble that requires a different check entirely, such as Iserith's rotgrub example? What if the approach as stated by the player is really important? Do I have to ask the player to clarify what they are doing after they've already rolled a 20 on their unstated action?</p><p></p><p>I'm saying this as someone who used to run the game the "old way" for many years. But honestly, reading these forums has changed my mind about it. Now that I'm running it with a focus on action and approach, I get much more meaningful interactions from my players. The game just runs more smoothly. And I run 3.5 mind you, which instructs the DM to do the opposite. The DMG and PHB literally tell the players to roll when taking an action. But I don't play that way any more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Imaculata, post: 7504638, member: 6801286"] So you never describe a room that has furniture in it? Because details about a room that aren't necessarily important for gameplay do occur plenty of times in my experience. Now, I tend to draw attention to the things that are really important, but a room can also contain things that aren't. And nothing is stopping the players from investigating those details. But you can also use other examples. What if the players want to interrogate a prisoner who is willing to give them information, and does not need to be intimidated? Auto-success if they press him for information, right? What if the players want to stealth past a bunch of knocked out drunk guards? Again, might be considered an auto-success, no roll required. Or what if auto-fail is guaranteed? What if the players are trying to convince a guard that they didn't commit a crime, that the guard watched them do? I'd say no roll is going to convince that guard otherwise, even if they roll super high. I think it is preferable that the players simply state what they want to do, and how they do it, instead of auto-rolling. Then I don't have to presume how they perform their action, or constantly have to ask them to clarify. And if a different roll is needed than the one they would presume, then we also dodge that problem as well. Oh come on, you know that is not what we're advocating for. All we ask for is that a player states their action and approach. That is a pretty basic standard for communication. All a player has to say is "[I]I search the pile of rubble with my shovel[/I]" or "[I]I put on gloves and carefully search the pile of rubble[/I]". Any detail will help us as DM to determine if there are complications in what you are trying to do. But hey, maybe the following example will clarify things: Now consider the alternative: This is what I take issue with. I want to get my players out of this habit of focusing on rolls, and engage more with the fiction. This also avoids a situation where I want a different check. What if instead there is something under the pile of rubble that requires a different check entirely, such as Iserith's rotgrub example? What if the approach as stated by the player is really important? Do I have to ask the player to clarify what they are doing after they've already rolled a 20 on their unstated action? I'm saying this as someone who used to run the game the "old way" for many years. But honestly, reading these forums has changed my mind about it. Now that I'm running it with a focus on action and approach, I get much more meaningful interactions from my players. The game just runs more smoothly. And I run 3.5 mind you, which instructs the DM to do the opposite. The DMG and PHB literally tell the players to roll when taking an action. But I don't play that way any more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
Top