Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7600058" data-attributes="member: 996">That's certainly familiar (even stereotypical) player behavior from back in the day.FREX:DM:  You see a door.Player: Is it sturdy?DM:  As you examine the door to determine how sturdy it is, the green slime coating it kills you.  Roll up a new character.Player:  No, no, I meant: what kind of door?  wood?  iron-bound? does it have a latch or a metal handle or something? At a glance does it look old? new? strong? rotted?   DM: Too late.  New character.Player:  You're a jerk, Steve.*And, I did see it starting to come back with 5e.  In 3.5 or even 4e, a player might have a really good idea not only of his character's ability and how it worked, but of the likely difficulty (DC or other factors) of a possible action.  In 5e, as in the classic game, you can't be so sure.  Unlike in the olden days when DMs would often make up random resolution mechanics off the cuff (roll d20 under your stat, roll d20 you want high, roll d6 even/odd no I won't tell you which is good, roll every dice you own take that much damage, etc), you at least know that if there is going to be a mechanic invoked, it'll likely be a check, and you have a fair idea what stat and skill might apply (and thus what the mod on your side will be), but whether there's a roll at all, and vs what DC (and maybe Adv/Dis) is entirely up to the DM. Players thus try to find ways to deal with that uncertainty.While action declaration and resolution is a pretty tight ship, there's a little wiggle room in the first step - DM describes the situation.  A picture's worth a thousand words & all, and there's no picture, so the DM may be giving some pretty substantial descriptions that may be hard to follow, so it's only natural for players to ask questions in this step to clarify and get an understanding of said situation appropriate to what their characters are simply taking in at a glance.  It's not hard to fish for information about the best solution or the probable mechanical resolution involved (if any) of possible problems presented by that situation.  (And, no, I'm not going to give an example mocking millennials the same way I did my own generation, above.  I really want to, but I'm tak'n the high road for once.Also, I can't think of anything quite as funny, because it wouldn't be as dysfunctional - might even be some iserithean gametopia.  Except, it'd end with "You're a jerk, Brandon**"  )* or Mike or Dave, most guys of gaming age back in the 80s were one of the three.** because it seems like a lotta kids were being named Brandon. Or Taylor, yeah, that one's even unisex.</blockquote>

Verification