I am involved in another game, off site, where the DM is very fond of using secret information.
You rolled the check? You , and you alone, get to know something.
Now, if you are in the sharing mood and want to pass that info along ... you are more than welcome, but it is not required.
It's exhausting.
I was playing a spell caster, tons of knowledge typer skills. Toward the end, I told the DM that my role had basically devolved into being a parrot. That my only meaningful contribution to the tale was to be the guy who said, 'hey guys, watch out ... that's dangerous., and here is why.'
The DM and I took it behind the scenes and we compromised that I would play a less knowledge based character. I retooled the character as a big dumb fighter ... and now the tale is much more enjoyable. Because now my BDF gets to be the one that charges in, and shakes the scene up. Let some other guy worry about spending his action to see what, if anything, he knows about the fungus or whatever ... I am just going spend an action to hit it with my sword. :)
Hmm, trying to think if there is anything Cass wants to buy before we go see the Baron. Some perfume would be good to increase persuasion. 200 gp but that's all I can think of lol. But if nobody else is ready to go I'm fine with going straight there.
Cool, cool. Moving forward, if you have something that grant advantage — and are planning on using it — its use must be declared prior to the roll. Or, in other words, the first roll has to be made with advantage.
I'm not too worried about it in this instance, as the perfume was purchased in advance of this social encounter for exactly this type of thing.
I just don't want to fall into the trap of 'we roll first, and if the result is no good, then we declare we had advantage all along and roll again.'
Not really relevant right now, but I find it interesting what each knowledge skill includes in the new rules (specifically which creatures are associated with each):
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarifiedin msg#456
Great question. During a combat encounter, things are a bit more scripted as far as how actions play out, and what actions may be taken.
During any sort of encounter that happens outside of init, it gets a bit murkier.
Here is a cut-and-paste from the rulebook in the section titled, Rhythm of Play.
1. The Dungeon Master Describes a Scene. The DM tells the players where their adventurers are and what’s around them (how many doors lead out of a room, what’s on a table, and so on).
2. The Players Describe What Their Characters Do. Typically, the characters stick together as they travel through a dungeon or another environment. Sometimes different adventurers do different things: one adventurer might search a treasure chest while a second examines a mysterious symbol engraved on a wall and a third keeps watch for monsters. Outside combat, the DM ensures that every character has a chance to act and decides how to resolve their activity. In combat, the characters take turns.
3. The DM Narrates the Results of the Adventurers’ Actions. Sometimes resolving a task is easy. If an adventurer walks across a room and tries to open a door, the DM might say the door opens and describe what lies beyond. But the door might be locked, the floor might hide a trap, or some other circumstance might make it challenging for an adventurer to complete a task. In those cases, the DM might ask the player to roll a die to help determine what happens. Describing the results often leads to another decision point, which brings the game back to step 1.
Of particular note is the 'phase' (for lack of a better word) of when the dice rolls are called for.
When we are outside of combat (or more accurately, outside of initiative) I'd like to see more of this style. That is, I describe the scene. Then each player has a chance to say what (if anything) their character is going to do, or how their character responds, or what-have-you.
In the next phase, rolls are made on the behalf of, and/or requested from the players.
Then I can narrate one big response to everyone's actions.
Now, in order to streamline play, I think what a lot of us do is describe the action we would like to take and then also toss the dice that might get called for. It's not wrong, per se, to do it that way ... but I have found that when playing this game via PbP it tends to have a chilling effect on others' likelihood to post.
The reason is simple, and I totally understand the though process behind it. The other players want to see how the attempt at XYZ played out before making a contribution of their own.
But if we settle into that routine, the game quickly gets away from a cycle of posts where each player crafts a response and then I craft a response that sums everything up (resetting the clock, as it were) and then we repeat.
What we end up with is I type up a large post, and one player makes a roll. Play essentially pauses right then and there until I get a chance to adjudicate the roll. Other players might (and probably will) choose to wait until posting actions of their own. Also, through PbP medium, I essentially have to play the game 4x faster or at the very least, 4x more often (because I now have to respond to each player's post), and the players then are posting 4x slower (only responding to about 1-in-4 posts from me).
I don't necessarily think that the 'fix' is to make everyone wait to roll until called upon to do so. Some actions are just inherently connected to a dice roll ('I sneak past the guard' here is my Dexterity [Stealth] attempt). So I don't have a problem with folks including a roll if they feel the action is going to require one.
But ... (you could hear the 'But' coming, right?) ... I also don't want the game to settle into a rhythm of 'I craft a post, one players does a thing, and now I have to respond ... which sets a whole new scene.' If that were to become the norm, I think slower or less eager players would be left in the dust.
Because each time I 'reset' the scene with some new description ... players (including the player that just adjusted the scene via some sort of action) would get a chance to respond. I could see a nightmare scenario where a less-eager/less-availabale player logs back in ... only to find that the scene moved along — far along — without them. Like, between the last time they checkin and now, seven different rolls were made and adjudicated ... and now the cool thing described way back in post #1 that their character really wanted to respond to is sort of a moot point because the scene advanced so rapidly and they never got the chance.
So I think that in a perfect world, as long as we are keeping a somewhat expected rhythm of 'I post, then the four players post, then I sum up and we repeat.' It doesn't really matter when the rolls occur (I don't have that much heartburn with rolls being included as a part of someone's action ... I just don't want folks to get comfortable with non-contributions to the game because they would rather wait and see what happens).
To the other part of your question. Namely, 'should I roll, or should the other character do it? We have different modifiers.'
I haven't really been playing 'I have a secret' when letting folks know what the results of their rolls are. Pretty much, I have been revealing what folks know in the main IC thread as soon as they know it. This doesn't necessarily mean that every other character knows it. I haven't really seen any players abuse the player vs. character knowledge aspect of the game, so I don't mind continuing to do the info reveals in this manner.
The type of task to be undertaken matters tho. Some things, everyone can do, all at once. And it doesn't matter if one guy passes and the other guys fails. Skills like perception come to mind here. You see it or you don't. The next guy sees it or he doesn't. Etc. But I guess in certain cases, the attempt at interacting with the story in some way, makes the next attempt to do the very same thing a completely different situation. 'I pull the lever' followed by 'I too, pull the lever' gets pretty weird if pulling the lever sets off a trap or something.
Again, in a perfect world, these types of things would get sorted out by a 5-second conversation. As opposed to a 3-day evolution between 5 posts on a forum board.
So I think we come back round, full circle, to the suggested style in the book that says. I describe the scene, you guys tell me what you's like to do, and thenI call for rolls (if required) and then narrate results. That way ... let's say that multiple people all wanted to do the same thing ... but story-wise, IC ... only one person could attempt the thing. Well, after multiple people all tell me that XYZ is their stated goal ... maybe I only call for one hero to make a roll ... but because of the help being provided, they may do so with advantage. SOmething like that.
TL;DR ... I'd like to keep the posting rhythm, as much as is possible, to DM — followed by four players — followed by DM — followed by four players — repeat Ad Infinitum, etc.
Now, the exact where and when those rolls come into the equation ... we can play it by ear. If folks want to add their roll to the post in which they describe the action, I guess I don't mind it (with the caveat that I do not what us to get conditioned to see one roll and then pause play until the roll is addressed/narrated/resolved by the DM).
[/EndRant]
EDIT— The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
I don't even mind if someone tosses in a roll. Sometimes it is just glaringly obvious what the roll is going to be.
But if it is going to be something where everyone helps one guy do something, then yeah, should probably hold off until everyone that will be contributing to that roll to weigh in. Hat way the guy with the best modifier gets picked to roll and then everyone else is 'helping.'
The only thing I don't want to see is where people see a dice roll in the thread, and then waits (instead of posting) to see what is going on before they contribute.
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
^^ Each time I post, in other words, I'd like each player to chime in.
Once I see that all players have had a chance to act ... I will resolve those player actions (calling for rolls if needed, or just using the provided rolls if they happened to be in the previous posts).
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
So in situations like now where I haven't posted because Chromir is just there listening and choosing to not get involved, you would prefer that I write a post to state that Chromir is taking essentially no action?
So Navrine would definitely have hood up and be 100% observant of his mannerisms and the surroundings, ready for fight or flight. But as she hears the noble's words could her passive insight of 14 give her any information?
So in situations like now where I haven't posted because Chromir is just there listening and choosing to not get involved, you would prefer that I write a post to state that Chromir is taking essentially no action?
That could count as Insight or Perception or help for one of those.
I am involved in another game, off site, where the DM is very fond of using secret information.
You rolled the check? You , and you alone, get to know something.
Now, if you are in the sharing mood and want to pass that info along ... you are more than welcome, but it is not required.
It's exhausting.
I was playing a spell caster, tons of knowledge typer skills. Toward the end, I told the DM that my role had basically devolved into being a parrot. That my only meaningful contribution to the tale was to be the guy who said, 'hey guys, watch out ... that's dangerous., and here is why.'
The DM and I took it behind the scenes and we compromised that I would play a less knowledge based character. I retooled the character as a big dumb fighter ... and now the tale is much more enjoyable. Because now my BDF gets to be the one that charges in, and shakes the scene up. Let some other guy worry about spending his action to see what, if anything, he knows about the fungus or whatever ... I am just going spend an action to hit it with my sword. :)
Hmm, trying to think if there is anything Cass wants to buy before we go see the Baron. Some perfume would be good to increase persuasion. 200 gp but that's all I can think of lol. But if nobody else is ready to go I'm fine with going straight there.
Is the Baron's residence in town or is it a journey to get to it?
An estate. Not in town, but close.
There and back in the same day. In other words, no need to prepare for a multi-day overland journey.
Cool, just let me know what you bought so I can update your offsite sheet as well.
Just Perfume and some Fine Clothes, so that's -20 gp unless he can try persuasion to haggle.
Whew, without the perfume that would've been a 9.
Cool, cool. Moving forward, if you have something that grant advantage — and are planning on using it — its use must be declared prior to the roll. Or, in other words, the first roll has to be made with advantage.
I'm not too worried about it in this instance, as the perfume was purchased in advance of this social encounter for exactly this type of thing.
I just don't want to fall into the trap of 'we roll first, and if the result is no good, then we declare we had advantage all along and roll again.'
Gotcha, that makes sense.
Does the Baron happen to have red eyes?
He does not.
Not really relevant right now, but I find it interesting what each knowledge skill includes in the new rules (specifically which creatures are associated with each):
For situations like this, are multiple of us allowed to roll Insight, or should only the person with the highest multiplier (Navrine) do it?
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
Great question. During a combat encounter, things are a bit more scripted as far as how actions play out, and what actions may be taken.
During any sort of encounter that happens outside of init, it gets a bit murkier.
Here is a cut-and-paste from the rulebook in the section titled, Rhythm of Play.
Of particular note is the 'phase' (for lack of a better word) of when the dice rolls are called for.
When we are outside of combat (or more accurately, outside of initiative) I'd like to see more of this style. That is, I describe the scene. Then each player has a chance to say what (if anything) their character is going to do, or how their character responds, or what-have-you.
In the next phase, rolls are made on the behalf of, and/or requested from the players.
Then I can narrate one big response to everyone's actions.
Now, in order to streamline play, I think what a lot of us do is describe the action we would like to take and then also toss the dice that might get called for. It's not wrong, per se, to do it that way ... but I have found that when playing this game via PbP it tends to have a chilling effect on others' likelihood to post.
The reason is simple, and I totally understand the though process behind it. The other players want to see how the attempt at XYZ played out before making a contribution of their own.
But if we settle into that routine, the game quickly gets away from a cycle of posts where each player crafts a response and then I craft a response that sums everything up (resetting the clock, as it were) and then we repeat.
What we end up with is I type up a large post, and one player makes a roll. Play essentially pauses right then and there until I get a chance to adjudicate the roll. Other players might (and probably will) choose to wait until posting actions of their own. Also, through PbP medium, I essentially have to play the game 4x faster or at the very least, 4x more often (because I now have to respond to each player's post), and the players then are posting 4x slower (only responding to about 1-in-4 posts from me).
I don't necessarily think that the 'fix' is to make everyone wait to roll until called upon to do so. Some actions are just inherently connected to a dice roll ('I sneak past the guard' here is my Dexterity [Stealth] attempt). So I don't have a problem with folks including a roll if they feel the action is going to require one.
But ... (you could hear the 'But' coming, right?) ... I also don't want the game to settle into a rhythm of 'I craft a post, one players does a thing, and now I have to respond ... which sets a whole new scene.' If that were to become the norm, I think slower or less eager players would be left in the dust.
Because each time I 'reset' the scene with some new description ... players (including the player that just adjusted the scene via some sort of action) would get a chance to respond. I could see a nightmare scenario where a less-eager/less-availabale player logs back in ... only to find that the scene moved along — far along — without them. Like, between the last time they checkin and now, seven different rolls were made and adjudicated ... and now the cool thing described way back in post #1 that their character really wanted to respond to is sort of a moot point because the scene advanced so rapidly and they never got the chance.
So I think that in a perfect world, as long as we are keeping a somewhat expected rhythm of 'I post, then the four players post, then I sum up and we repeat.' It doesn't really matter when the rolls occur (I don't have that much heartburn with rolls being included as a part of someone's action ... I just don't want folks to get comfortable with non-contributions to the game because they would rather wait and see what happens).
To the other part of your question. Namely, 'should I roll, or should the other character do it? We have different modifiers.'
I haven't really been playing 'I have a secret' when letting folks know what the results of their rolls are. Pretty much, I have been revealing what folks know in the main IC thread as soon as they know it. This doesn't necessarily mean that every other character knows it. I haven't really seen any players abuse the player vs. character knowledge aspect of the game, so I don't mind continuing to do the info reveals in this manner.
The type of task to be undertaken matters tho. Some things, everyone can do, all at once. And it doesn't matter if one guy passes and the other guys fails. Skills like perception come to mind here. You see it or you don't. The next guy sees it or he doesn't. Etc. But I guess in certain cases, the attempt at interacting with the story in some way, makes the next attempt to do the very same thing a completely different situation. 'I pull the lever' followed by 'I too, pull the lever' gets pretty weird if pulling the lever sets off a trap or something.
Again, in a perfect world, these types of things would get sorted out by a 5-second conversation. As opposed to a 3-day evolution between 5 posts on a forum board.
So I think we come back round, full circle, to the suggested style in the book that says. I describe the scene, you guys tell me what you's like to do, and thenI call for rolls (if required) and then narrate results. That way ... let's say that multiple people all wanted to do the same thing ... but story-wise, IC ... only one person could attempt the thing. Well, after multiple people all tell me that XYZ is their stated goal ... maybe I only call for one hero to make a roll ... but because of the help being provided, they may do so with advantage. SOmething like that.
TL;DR ... I'd like to keep the posting rhythm, as much as is possible, to DM — followed by four players — followed by DM — followed by four players — repeat Ad Infinitum, etc.
Now, the exact where and when those rolls come into the equation ... we can play it by ear. If folks want to add their roll to the post in which they describe the action, I guess I don't mind it (with the caveat that I do not what us to get conditioned to see one roll and then pause play until the roll is addressed/narrated/resolved by the DM).
[/EndRant]
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
So pretty much the same as we're doing, but no rolls until everyone has posted what they're doing and you ask for them?
I don't even mind if someone tosses in a roll. Sometimes it is just glaringly obvious what the roll is going to be.
But if it is going to be something where everyone helps one guy do something, then yeah, should probably hold off until everyone that will be contributing to that roll to weigh in. Hat way the guy with the best modifier gets picked to roll and then everyone else is 'helping.'
The only thing I don't want to see is where people see a dice roll in the thread, and then waits (instead of posting) to see what is going on before they contribute.
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
^^ Each time I post, in other words, I'd like each player to chime in.
Once I see that all players have had a chance to act ... I will resolve those player actions (calling for rolls if needed, or just using the provided rolls if they happened to be in the previous posts).
EDIT — The DM's stance on posting frequency has been clarified in msg#456
So in situations like now where I haven't posted because Chromir is just there listening and choosing to not get involved, you would prefer that I write a post to state that Chromir is taking essentially no action?
After joining more my signature got out of hand so I am now a proud member of the extended signature club!! :)
So Navrine would definitely have hood up and be 100% observant of his mannerisms and the surroundings, ready for fight or flight. But as she hears the noble's words could her passive insight of 14 give her any information?
敬意をこめて,
ジョニー.
Keii o komete,
Johnny.
That could count as Insight or Perception or help for one of those.