What is the point of GM's notes?

[Fenris-77]

Right. Flashbacks if successful ARE useful. The same cannot be said about lore.

Actually, no, there's often an action roll involved, so there's lots of room for complications and failure.

 

[Maxperson]

Actually, no, there's often an action roll involved, so there's lots of room for complications and failure.

I didn't say they were always successful. I read the rules above and know there is often a roll involved that can fail. I said IF successful, they are useful.

 

[Fenris-77]

I didn't say they were always successful. I ready the rules above and know there is often a roll involved that can fail. I said IF successful, they are useful.

Just like a Lore check.

 

[Maxperson]

Just like a Lore check.

Well, no. I've already proven that successful lore checks are often not useful.

 

[Fenris-77]

Well, no. I've already proven that successful lore checks are often not useful.

Actually, you've done no such thing. If you make a lore check because it matters then it works exactly like I said it does. You now have a benefit against obstacle X, whatever that is.

 

[Maxperson]

Actually, you've done no such thing. If you make a lore check because it matters then it works exactly like I said it does. You now have a benefit against obstacle X, whatever that is.

What, am I supposed to pour over the players' sheets and only ask for a lore check if they can make use of the info? That's absurd. Lore is for knowledge, whether you can make use of it or not. It's part of the game.

 

[Fenris-77]

What, am I supposed to pour over the players' sheets and only ask for a lore check if they can make use of the info? That's absurd. Lore is for knowledge, whether you can make use of it or not. It's part of the game.

Ooooorrrr, you could take my example as written. When you make a lore check when it matters, as in because the lore is going to be important to overcoming an obstacle, then it works as I said it does. You can also flashback for no stress for minor crap, so lets not let that get in our way shall we. Just because you could make a lore check for useless information doesn't mean that's how it normally works. I could flashback to buy a pastry too, but that doesn't mean that's a great example of how flashbacks are used.

 

[Maxperson]

Ooooorrrr, you could take my example as written. When you make a lore check when it matters, as in because the lore is going to be important to overcoming an obstacle, then it works as I said it does. You can also flashback for no stress for minor crap, so lets not let that get in our way shall we. Just because you could make a lore check for useless information doesn't mean that's how it normally works. I could flashback to buy a pastry too, but that doesn't mean that's a great example of how flashbacks are used.

So now I'm expected to alter reality so that the lore matters?

DM: You learn that the creature is vulnerable to sound. Wizard, your fireball is now a soundball, just because you made a successful lore check.

Edit: How I'm describing it is exactly how it normally works. Lore checks are to find out info about something. Period. That's their purpose. If that info is useful, great. If not, not.

 

[Fenris-77]

So now I'm expected to alter reality so that the lore matters?

DM: You learn that the creature is vulnerable to sound. Wizard, your fireball is now a soundball, just because you made a successful lore check.

What in the world are you talking about?

 

[Campbell]

Generally in most games if knowledge checks are a thing (not super crazy about them) I would expect a successful check to answer whatever question the player had about the fiction according to their established fictional positioning. I mean if you do not know what's in question how can you set a DC?