Community

With the focus on narrative adjudication rather than on mechanical blueprinting, a guideline should be provided.  The list of DC ranges is not enough.  What statuses are appropriate for improvised actions.  What levels of damage are.   If you are trying to revert to a system that is based on a DM's call, where are the guidelines to making that call. 

In addition to a page 42 style mechanical starting point for improvisation, I think a discussion is also in order for guidlines for soliciting input and encouraging player engagement through the interpretation of actions and the awarding of advantage and disadvantage.

I +1 this thread

Jun 1, 2012 -- 12:59PM, Electricbee wrote:

With the focus on narrative adjudication rather than on mechanical blueprinting, a guideline should be provided.  The list of DC ranges is not enough.  What statuses are appropriate for improvised actions.  What levels of damage are.   If you are trying to revert to a system that is based on a DM's call, where are the guidelines to making that call. 

In addition to a page 42 style mechanical starting point for improvisation, I think a discussion is also in order for guidlines for soliciting input and encouraging player engagement through the interpretation of actions and the awarding of advantage and disadvantage.

I have said frequently that if they plan on having "improvise" being such a huge part of the game they need to give me examples and guidelines so I know the parameters I'm working within- Can an intimidate check be as powerful as a mass fear spell even for a short time for ecample.

I've also said that if the "improvise" action is meant to be the bread and butter way of making some classes (rogue and fighter) more interesting than "I swing my sword this round" that they darned sure better give those classes advantages to performing those improvised actions over the ones who have more interesting options built into their class.

DM Guidelines, pages 3 and 4.

What went missing in D&D, at least for me during the stat-sim style of the last few editions, is the sense that this is my world I share with these players. The last thing I need in a game is a player constantly pointing to tables to tell me how to run the adventure. If you chose me to be a DM or agreed to play in my game, please let me do my job.

Players will always go off the map. You needn't a die roll to bring them back and as long you know the adventure and it's goals, you ought to get by with that.  Otherwise, explain to the player(s) that the next roll does in no way set any precedence for future, similar attempts.  It rewards their creativity without entitling them future concessions. 

I've played in other game systems where every challenged action resolved on the character's stats vs some kind of target number.  None of these provided any exhaustive examples but it didn't derail the game when a player tried something truly bizarre.

Give the Test Rules a chance and maybe goad the players into pushing an envelope or two.  You'll grow stronger as a DM and the results will help shape the Test material.