(in D&D at least)

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because I don’t have everyone’s modifier for every skill, ability, saving throw, and attack memorized off the top of my head, nor do I have magical foresight into whether or not they will choose to use abilities that would add more additional points on top of those modifiers.

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      I agree. In casual play you can rely on veteran players to know their stats. If they’re the type to lie intentionally then they can leave the table. If they’re making mistakes then maybe something goes a little too easily, oh well. The best DMs i had didn’t give a shit and focused on rewarding players for learning.

    • Cornbread@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      You should at least have a general idea of your PC’s skillsets. As in, don’t let the country bumpkin make Arcana checks about monsters he’s never seen, or let the stick figure try to punch down a wall. If you look at a character in a situation and think, “there’s no way that could succeed,” then they shouldn’t be making a check.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Think of it from their point of view though. They want to try and do something. For me to just flat out tell them “no, there’s no possible way” is discouraging and robs them of autonomy. Obviously for crazy extreme circumstances I won’t let them, like “let me convince the king to abdicate to me!” type things. But if I think the DC should be 25 or something I’m not gonna bother wasting my time calculating what the theoretical maximum could be for the roll because I genuinely cannot know. The player can always do things I don’t expect or use other players’ things to help. For reasonable but implausible things I’ll allow rolls even if a nat 20 wouldn’t work because I’m not calculating what a nat 20 could theoretically be.

        Plus, I often give people little flavor benefits for nat 20s even if they don’t have mechanical success.

      • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        don’t let the country bumpkin make Arcana checks about monsters he’s never seen

        Why not? It could be fun! Of course non-critical rolls would be useless, but on a critical failure they could convince the whole party that dragons can’t see movement, and on a critical success they could buy mere chance figure out where its voonerables are (it’s a million-to-one chance, but it might just work!)…

        or let the stick figure try to punch down a wall

        Again, why not? All rolls, they take a bit of damage; critical failure, they break their arm or hand, and manage to dislodge a brick which starts a comically unlikely and extremely noisy Rube Goldberg chain reaction which ends up waking up and alerting all the guards; critical success, they hit the hidden button that opens the secret door (in another wall), starting a whole new subquest.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I regularly play in groups with eight player characters, Kolkani. Do you want me to check all eight of their sheets and all their abilities that could possibly modify their scores or just ask them to make a Blah (Foo) check check and see what the result is? It’s gonna be way faster for everyone to just ask them to roll.

          • Skua@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I don’t think I’ve ever needed more information than character level and a vague sense of whether that character/player is more or less effective in combat/social encounters than usual to make them. I definitely don’t need to worry about whether they’ve got expertise in history, that’s something they can bring up when I ask them for a history check

          • 🔍🦘🛎@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Throwing whatever you please at them. It’s fair because they’re informed of the risks and given opportunities to adjust their plans.