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 LIVE! 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
Your one best piece of GM/DM advice?
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="77IM" data-source="post: 6965425" data-attributes="member: 12377"><p>I offered some advice upthread so please consider this my second-best GM advice.</p><p></p><p>Use ability checks to say "Yes, but..." to your players. When they want to do something <em>blatantly against the rules,</em> if it makes sense as something their character might be able to do, have them make an ability check of some sort (details vary based on game system). On a success, they can do it; on a failure, they can't, and might even face negative consequences as a result of the attempt.</p><p></p><p>This works much better than just saying "No." By allowing a check, even a difficult one, you take much of the decision out of your hands. Ultimately the dice are deciding, but also the player can decide how much effort they want to put into it (expending special resources to improve their results; again, details vary by game system). It works well because even if the players fail, they still feel that they at least had a shot; and when they succeed, you know they "earned" it, and you're not just being a softie.</p><p></p><p>In most respects this is no different than a regular ability/skill check. Except that I advocate allowing check results to override even things that are phrased in the rules as absolutes. E.g., <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You want to move farther than your speed allows? Yes, but... make a Dexterity check, and if you fail, you fall on your face.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You want to concentrate on two spells at once? Yes, but... make a Constitution check, and if you fail, you lose <em>both</em> spells.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You want to just totally ignore the mind-control for 1 round? Yes, but... make a Wisdom check, and if you fail, not only are you still mind-controlled, but saves to escape from mind-control are at disadvantage.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You want to cast <em>lightning bolt</em> as a cone instead of a line? Yes, but... make an Intelligence check, and if you fail, then your spell hits you and no-one else.</li> </ul><p>The rules phrase those things as absolutes: a <em>lightning bolt</em> is a line, end-of-story. I think everyone will be happier if you let go of such rigid interpretations and allow capable characters to break those rules a little bit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="77IM, post: 6965425, member: 12377"] I offered some advice upthread so please consider this my second-best GM advice. Use ability checks to say "Yes, but..." to your players. When they want to do something [I]blatantly against the rules,[/I] if it makes sense as something their character might be able to do, have them make an ability check of some sort (details vary based on game system). On a success, they can do it; on a failure, they can't, and might even face negative consequences as a result of the attempt. This works much better than just saying "No." By allowing a check, even a difficult one, you take much of the decision out of your hands. Ultimately the dice are deciding, but also the player can decide how much effort they want to put into it (expending special resources to improve their results; again, details vary by game system). It works well because even if the players fail, they still feel that they at least had a shot; and when they succeed, you know they "earned" it, and you're not just being a softie. In most respects this is no different than a regular ability/skill check. Except that I advocate allowing check results to override even things that are phrased in the rules as absolutes. E.g.,[list][*]You want to move farther than your speed allows? Yes, but... make a Dexterity check, and if you fail, you fall on your face.[*]You want to concentrate on two spells at once? Yes, but... make a Constitution check, and if you fail, you lose [I]both[/I] spells.[*]You want to just totally ignore the mind-control for 1 round? Yes, but... make a Wisdom check, and if you fail, not only are you still mind-controlled, but saves to escape from mind-control are at disadvantage.[*]You want to cast [I]lightning bolt[/I] as a cone instead of a line? Yes, but... make an Intelligence check, and if you fail, then your spell hits you and no-one else.[/list] The rules phrase those things as absolutes: a [I]lightning bolt[/I] is a line, end-of-story. I think everyone will be happier if you let go of such rigid interpretations and allow capable characters to break those rules a little bit. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Your one best piece of GM/DM advice?
Top