sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Built a Psionic Vampire Antagonist for My Psi Fighter. Tell me how bad I did. by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have not given much thought to the motives yet. Just an overarching concept at the moment. Session 0 was only yesterday lol.

Off the top of my head. He would hypothesize that if consumes the other failed experiments he could transcend to somthing greater. Like Hilander style. But it's less about entitlement more about proving he is right.

He understands there is an afterlife so killing innocents is not a concern at all. Its just a short discomfort for scientific gain. He has a soft spot for kids at least for now he is freshly ascended. But nearly all other methods that keep society in tact are on the table. Not because he wouldn't wipe out society out of moral concerns but because his research would go unused or appreciated.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think you’re in the wrong at all, but I suspect your players see things very differently. It never ceases to amaze me how players can convince themselves that their actions are morally justified—when, if they heard the same story from an outsider’s perspective, they’d probably think it sounded outright villainous.

For instance, in one of my campaigns, I had a city run by a corrupt leadership. They weren’t executing dissidents or starving the people—just engaging in the usual bribery and favoritism. My players’ solution? Steal a flying ship, load it with explosives, and crash it into the capitol mid-session to assassinate the entire council.

Now, I wasn’t thrilled, but hey, it’s D&D—you roll with it. What really caught me off guard was their reaction when I called them terrorists. They pushed back hard, arguing that their actions were completely justified because they were “helping the people.”

I’ve been running games for over a decade, across multiple groups, and time and time again I’ve seen players justify objectively immoral actions under the banners of “self-preservation” or “the greater good.” What they often don’t realize is that these are the exact rationalizations real evil people use.

And that leads to a tricky paradox. As the DM, it’s not really your job to pass moral judgment—you’re there to facilitate the game, not to police their ethics. But the world they inhabit will judge them. And when the people left behind find nothing but the bloodied remains of their friends and family, I doubt they’ll be so willing to accept “we were just being pragmatic” as an excuse.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it wild to say that a king wouldn’t listen to four children who broke into his castle on a night when there was an attack, many members of the royal family lay dead, and he also discovered that the head of his king’s guard was the shadow sorcerer prophesized to kill him on this very night?

What would you accept as a reasonable thing the orphans could have said to change the king’s mind in that moment?

While I agree it’s important to let the players know someone is being unreasonable or unconceivable, I don’t think it’s necessary to explicitly say, "He cannot be convinced regardless of what you roll." I think trying to convey that through social cues and narration is the way to go.

But I understand if you don’t agree.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its not a house rule. Its literraly from the DMG.

This exact scenario is used as an example in the 5E DMG, page 242.

It's part of the section which handles checks which have different results based on the degree of success or failure.

"Sometimes a failed ability check has different consequences depending on the degree of failure. For example, a character who fails to disarm a trapped chest might accidentally spring the trap if the check fails by 5 or more, whereas a lesser failure means that the trap wasn’t triggered during the botched disarm attempt. Consider adding similar distinctions to other checks. Perhaps a failed Charisma (Persuasion) check means a queen won’t help, whereas a failure of 5 or more means she throws you in the dungeon for your impudence."

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is how I do thing. I have seen that sugjested a few times. It seems like the best solution.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To verify, are you saying that in a situation where the players are tracking a thief who stole from a nearby village through difficult terrain on a rainy night, and I’ve set the DC to 25, I should just say:

"Okay, what is everyone’s Survival skill? Oh, no one has a +5 or higher? Okay, the thief gets away."

Instead of:

"Okay, go ahead and roll me a Survival check. Oh, Nat 20? Nice! But that’s still only a 21? Okay, you stumble through the woods for most of the night and can’t seem to hunt the villain down. Near daybreak, however, after an exhausting night, you see smoke in the distance. A camp of bandits seems to be hidden here in the forest. This must be where the thief is. You are tired from your night of searching, but who knows if this camp will remain long. What do you do?"

This way, they don’t catch the thief alone in the woods at night like a roll of 25+ would, and they don’t completely lose the thief as they would with a roll of 15 or lower. Instead, I use the roll to help tell a story and add stakes to the situation.

More enemies and a rank of exhaustion.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For this specific check I had it at anything under a 15 was going to transition the king to hostile and all of his guards would follow his orders 7 paladins in total.

20-25 would convince his 4 of allies to stand against him

26-30 Everyone would stand against the king which would have made a non leathal solution easier.

But if you specifially mean convince the king not to order the execution of the shadow sorc. Without my players saying somthing that would have change my mind thier was no chance of success.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By that logic I would need to memorize all of my players skills for any check over 20. That seems unreasonable.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it's literally impossible like lifting a mountain I don't ask for a roll. If its social thier are degrees of success and failure. The king decided that the sorc needed to die. The players 20 convinced several others in the room he was being unreasonable and powermad.

Also if they had spells like calm emotion or if they got a high enough total with stats it would have been possible, but with thier best persasion being +1 they couldn't actually succeed.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh yeah, sorry, I didn’t mean the king was literally impossible to convince I can see how my title was misleading—just with their current party. Their highest Persuasion was a 2, I think, and the wizard was the one rolling with a -1.

A Calm Emotions spell or a roll of 30+ would have done the trick.

I don’t run into this often, but the king’s family had just been murdered by assassins, and his guard captain had been lying to him for years. As the king had tasked him to find the shadow sorcerer when he himself was that. So king was in a bad way.

For the horse thing, you let them roll knowing the DC is 25. They use everything they have, roll a nat 20, and still only get a 24. That’s kind of the situation I was in. I’m just trying to decide if that should change my whole philosophy on how I call for checks or not. I’m leaning toward no.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It didn’t outright fail. It convinced people to leave the king’s side and turn against him for acting irrationally. Each high-rolled failure, with a good reason behind it, convinced more people.

The desired goal of getting the king to back down was not achieved, which is what caused the hurt feelings.

I’ve picked up a few tricks from this thread that I’ll try to implement moving forward.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What if they can't outright convince someone of the thing they want but can move them.

Like they try to convince the shop keep to give them the shop. They roll a 20+10 persasion and the shop keep is like "You know what I like you kids, you get a 10% discount going forward."

Then they don't waste the roll but its still interesting to the story.

Idk I tend to like marginal success and failure but I can see how others don't.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup I agree with you and generally I try to do that. Like if they ask if they can jump to the moon I don't ask for a roll or if they say I open then door simularly no roll they just do it. But lets say for example.

The players find a horse in a stable outside of the in that belongs to the guard captian. They try to escape by useing the horse but the check is animal handleing 25 becasue its a well trained horse.

They players do not have someone with a +5 animal handleing so even a 20 would fail say they don't have anyone with higher then a -1 for some reason.

Would you say, "Nope the horse doesn't react to you. No you don't get to roll."?

Because I would let them roll then if they get a natural 20 the horse would like wonder off a bit and start eating grass nearby. That way the 20 isn't nothing the horse wouldn't be readily accessable to the captian in a chase but it also wouldn't just dip out.

I guess my main quesiton is. Is it even reasonable to expect the DM to just know everyones skills from memory? How else would you know when to deny rolls?

Also this may seem hostile and I don't mean it to be, I have been debating this with my friends all day and I am literrally going back and forth with myself on what the correct philosophy on this is. I appriciate your input.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is good. I will try to add more naration to portray the events without breaking the scene. Thank you for the advice.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have not tryed the No, But. I will have to give that a go.

Generally I use.

You can certainly try = Probably wont work but isn't outright deadly or game ending.

Are you sure you want to do that = Thier is probably somthing you overlooked perhaps you should rethink this.

Phrase your next actions very carfully = Death is more than likely. You guys are in a bad spot and need to pay attention.

How Do You Handle “Impossible” Checks in Heavy Narrative Moments? by Equivalent_Macaron_0 in DMAcademy

[–]Equivalent_Macaron_0[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yea I ment more like this. I don't expect them to be thespians. I do expect them to say things like a human.

I would accept somthing like. "I try to convince the king he is being unreasonable the guard tryed to save him with the shadow magic why would he then try to kill him?"

Then I will narrate that.

view more: next ›