Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7768643" data-attributes="member: 29398">Continuing my interrupted post from a day or two ago...To me they're much the same thing.&nbsp; Succeeding on an action (climbing the wall) and achieving a goal (reaching the wall's top) arrive at the same end point: you're on top of the wall.The main difference is that actions tend to be smaller scale while goals can be much larger in scale or scope.The same is, or can be, true in OS as well.&nbsp; You fail the climb, and someone asks questions - either the player asks 'why' or the DM asks (herself) 'what might happen next' - leading to various possible context-dependent narrations and outcomes beyond just a simple fall for some damage.The 'why were you trying to climb the rope [in the first place]' piece is in theory already dealt with by the greater context of whatever's going on at the time, and thus should be rather obvious.I disagree to some extent.&nbsp; The context matters in either case, not necessarily for the actual adjudication of the attempted action but for roleplaying and-or narrating what comes next should the action fail...or succeed, for that matter.You're trying to climb a wall and fail, and fall (let's assume you're still awake and functional after falling).&nbsp; Both in OS and NS the questions of how and why you were making the attempt will influence what comes next:You were trying to climb the wall to sneak into the Baron's manor - the next question will be how much noise did you make when you fell.You were trying to climb the wall to escape the Baron's guard dogs - the next question will be whether the fall delays you enough for the dogs to catch you.OS might separate these steps into more discrete parts than NS, but they're still there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7768643, member: 29398"] Continuing my interrupted post from a day or two ago... To me they're much the same thing. Succeeding on an action (climbing the wall) and achieving a goal (reaching the wall's top) arrive at the same end point: you're on top of the wall. The main difference is that actions tend to be smaller scale while goals can be much larger in scale or scope. The same is, or can be, true in OS as well. You fail the climb, and someone asks questions - either the player asks 'why' or the DM asks (herself) 'what might happen next' - leading to various possible context-dependent narrations and outcomes beyond just a simple fall for some damage. The 'why were you trying to climb the rope [in the first place]' piece is in theory already dealt with by the greater context of whatever's going on at the time, and thus should be rather obvious. I disagree to some extent. The context matters in either case, not necessarily for the actual adjudication of the attempted action but for roleplaying and-or narrating what comes next should the action fail...or succeed, for that matter. You're trying to climb a wall and fail, and fall (let's assume you're still awake and functional after falling). Both in OS and NS the questions of how and why you were making the attempt will influence what comes next: You were trying to climb the wall to sneak into the Baron's manor - the next question will be how much noise did you make when you fell. You were trying to climb the wall to escape the Baron's guard dogs - the next question will be whether the fall delays you enough for the dogs to catch you. OS might separate these steps into more discrete parts than NS, but they're still there. [/QUOTE]

Verification