TRPG General Chat

RollingFeles

16:00

@NautArch actually, I'm still not sure about this, but I'm inclined towards your statement. (hence +1)

Yuuki

It doesn't help that Crawford/Sage Advice have released kinda contradicting opinions.

RollingFeles

But I think it's pretty much covered in related/duped question about this whole confusion.

KorvinStarmast

I +1'd your answer, with your last edit, but I suspect that one of our previous Q's also covers this so the Q should have been closed as a dupe. Nothing big ...

NautArch

@RollingFeles I'm trying to figure out the -1 :)

RollingFeles

Also, I wasn't aware that dupe flagging adds auto comment.

Yuuki

16:02

Although I think we (the people in chat at the time) seemed to agree on this scenario.

Apr 28 at 14:13, by doppelgreener

So let's suppose this scenario. My perception modifier is +0, my passive perception is 10, my maximum active perception result is 20. I'm walking down a dark street:
- 5 perception: see the cat crossing the dark street.
- 15 perception: hear the argument going on in the nearby bar.
- 25 perception: realise there's someone following me. (They're very good at following people.)

Apr 28 at 14:15, by doppelgreener

When I'm walking down this street, I have already noticed the cat. I decide to do an active roll to see if there's any funny business around here: I could roll a 15+, and that means I notice that argument going on. I could roll a 3, but I've already noticed the cat, so if I do, nothing special happens - I just don't also notice the argument happening. I can never roll high enough to spot the person following me, but I was hoping I would do so if someone was!

KorvinStarmast

@NautArch Sometimes people down vote answers to dupe/should be closed questions, as one of the mods advised me a while back

NautArch

@RollingFeles I also don't think that the true dupe of it (which was marked as a dupe of passive/active confusion) is correct. OP and that question are about Passive as a Floor - not difference between passive/active.

Yuuki

@NautArch I don't think you can add Expertise to Passive Perception, can you?

NautArch

@Yuuki you get all modifiers that normally apply.

pp175 PHB

10+all modifiers

Yuuki

The question, how does the use of Passive Perception differ from rolled Perception?

Yeah, there's the meta "you roll one and not the other", but what does that mean in application?

NautArch

16:07

@Yuuki Right, I don' tthink that's the question. The question is "Is passive perception a floor for active perception?"

Yuuki

@NautArch To which the answer is "yes", "no", "maybe", and "depends on what sources you're using to influence your ruling".

NautArch

And if it is (as WaxEagle suggests and was upvoted for), then ALL passive scores have a base of 10 unless there are negative modifiers. And pretty sure that's not right.

@Yuuki where are the Crawford contradicting opinions?

Yuuki

I guess it's not so much a contradicting opinion so much as a "I didn't see the wording you used in the tweet".

It's just that the tweet was used to counter my citing of "passive perception is a floor, you roll Perception to see if you beat your passive".

NautArch

@Yuuki which tweet?

Yuuki

This one was brought up:

The design intent is that the DM uses passive checks. When players want to use an ability, they roll a d20. #DnD https://twitter.com/wastingx/status/661314487929057281

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on November 2, 2015 at 11:08 PM

RollingFeles

16:11

@NautArch that's also "not sure" situation. I voted for dupe. But I'm sure that reading original question and it's answer should help in resolving this confusion. They state similar ideas as yours answer.

I think it may be a good topic to discuss on meta.

Yuuki

But on second viewing, I don't think that applied to my point. Whereas Crawford recently went on a podcast to discuss Stealth rules.

Here at about 24:00.

NautArch

@Yuuki Wow. That's just. Um. Yeah.

Yuuki

For those who can't listen to the audio or are work filtered:

> "Really when you make that roll [Perception check], you're rolling to see "can I get a higher number?". If you fail to, well again, your Passive Perception score's still active. It is effectively creating the minimum."

NautArch

This just totally confused me and seems bizarre. Reliable talent is totally useless.

Yuuki

@NautArch As far as it pertains to Perception, perhaps, but that doesn't mean you can apply it to other skills.

NautArch

16:16

@Yuuki I'd have a hard time saying that one passive skill is always on, but others aren't.

Yuuki

@NautArch Are there other passive skills?

Passive Perception is the only one explicitly stated as far as I know.

diego

@Yuuki I think the Observant feat gives you a bonus to your Passive Investigation

Adam

There is a rule for generating any passive ability check. I forget the page reference though, but it does exist

NautArch

@Yuuki Every skill can have a passive test. Those are supposed to be used by DMs wanting to do "secret" checks. Observant is a great example of another, but the DM can use them anytime they want.

I think the key here is that the DM has to decide if a passive floor is valid for the situation.

But that just seems odd - because of reliable talent.

Adam

@Yuuki page 78

Yuuki

16:19

I mean, Reliable Talent's still not useless because there are skills that I don't really there being a passive check (Acrobatics, Athletics, etc.).

And I would argue that passive Knowledge checks don't really make sense.

(Active knowledge checks don't make much sense either, but whatever)

Adam

Passive checks can also be used to approximate the result of doing a task several times over again. For example, instead of rolling to jump between 3 buildings, you can just use passive acrobatics for all 3.

That's actually a kind of contrived example, but it gets the point across

Yuuki

@Adam Is that really a thing? "Well, I get two attacks this turn and I don't want to roll all of them, so I'll just take my passive Attack roll."

Adam

Attack rolls aren't an ability check, so you can't make those passively

Yuuki

"I don't want to have make grapple checks for the next few rounds, just use my passive Athletics check."

Adam

No, you can't do that. Passive checks model an average of several attempts, not the result of any particular attempt

Yuuki

16:23

@Adam Well then it doesn't apply to your building example either.

NautArch

@Yuuki But if a passive check is something you've done many times, then it still has ap lace. Jumping over a chasm? You've jumped distances before, why not have a passive floor?

Adam

I said it was contrived, didn't I :p

NautArch

Grappling? You're a goshdarned adventurer - athletics/acrobatics passive floor.

diego

I think climbing a wall where failing doesn't have any negative repercussions (other than taking time) would be a better example than jumping between buildings

Yuuki

@Adam It doesn't become magically applicable just because you said it's contrived :|

NautArch

16:25

@Yuuki Initiative is an ability check - why not passive floor?

once you open the door for a passive floor, it makes it pretty silly and a constant argument between DM and players.

Adam

@Yuuki Then it's a dead wrong example. The point being that if you do something, 10, 20, 30, 100 times or more, you can increasingly expect the average result to be your passive check. So, I guess a better example would be downtime activities and roleplaying being a merchant for a year. The average result of all of the charisma checks you make while bartering can be assumed to be your passive charisma check.

Yuuki

The problem with passive floors only seems to be when you try to extend it to skills other than Perception.

Adam

Over that one year. So instead of rolling 10 checks 365 times (assuming 10 checks a day for a year) you just use your passive check and go off of that.

Yuuki

The idea of a passive skill being the floor for Perception just intuitively makes sense to me.

Other skills, not so much.

NautArch

A ranger is a trained hunter. Why shouldn't they get passive floor on a survival check to find food?

Yuuki

16:28

@NautArch Because food has a +20 bonus to passive Stealth checks.

But it doesn't apply to active Stealth checks.

Adam

Why did they have to put the rules for passive checks in the player's guide? It really belongs in the DMG.

NautArch

@Adam that's...a very good point.

Adam

I know, lots of people read the DMG too, so knowledge would still go around, but the fact that it's in the player's guide means that players get the idea that it's a tool for them to use. It really isn't it's a DM tool

RollingFeles

@Adam it's simple: in order to allow play the game with one book.

DMG is an addition master's resource.

Maybe they thought that passive checks are more or less fundamental mechanic. But it doesn't seem like so.

Adam

You still wouldn't need it to play the game. You would just assume everything used active checks and do it that way.

RollingFeles

16:31

I can't argue with that :)

Adam

In fact, the very concept of active checks wouldn't be a thing. They would just be ability checks

NautArch

@Adam MINDFLAYER - get your logic out of thsi!

Yuuki

@NautArch One interesting point that I read is that you could always flavor passive use as giving you fuzzy results.

Like if something trips your Passive Perception, "you sense something moving in the underbrush".

But an active Perception check would result in "you see a [monster] in that bush over there".

So Reliable Talent could still be useful since it applies to your active check.

Adam

But then there's still the problem of botching the active check and then you get the "Great, I know there was something there, but I missed it because the dice failed me" feeling

Yuuki

How is that a problem?

Now you know something is there, I as DM would probably rule that you don't get surprised.

Adam

16:40

Then what is the point of the active check at all?

Yuuki

To pinpoint exactly where the monster is. Or whether there even is a monster. Could be just rustling leaves.

Adam

It's never rustling leaves. At least with my DM. The only things that get a check are stuff worth noticing.

diego

@Adam To have a chance to identify what was in the bush?

@Adam Why would the DM tell you that you used a Passive Check? One of the reasons for them is so the DM can use them in secret.

RollingFeles

I'm not even sure with this post. It asks several questions, but they are connected and more or less can be covered with one precise answer. And I'm not sure whether title is really representing this Q well.

Adam

Yeah, but I just mean that if you botch it, you know the character is like "Oh, probably nothing" and keeps going. But the player knows that there is something there. Something that's going to either try to eat you, or that is worth taking. So when they finally do get attacked, it's not "Surprise! It wasn't nothing!" It's "Yeah, I knew something was coming..."

Once you call for an active check, the players know there is something worth seeing, regardless of the result on the die

Yuuki

16:45

@Adam You don't have to call for an active check. I'm not a fan of "hey you, roll a Perception check".

The DM shouldn't tell players to roll their ability checks, the player should choose to roll their ability checks on their own.

That's exactly why passive skills are a thing, I believe.

diego

@Adam As a DM I wouldn't call for an active check. If the PCs say they are looking closer at it or moving in that direction (or something similar) then they can roll the active check, but not without them doing something to trigger it

Adam

@Yuuki The Players should describe their actions and the DM will tell them if that would require a check at all. I don't really like the idea of players calling out skill checks and just rolling them out in the open because they feel it is appropriate

Yuuki

@Adam That's still different from calling for a check.

I just don't like the idea of "you hear something behind that tree, roll a Perception check".

NautArch

@Yuuki Do you see it as a player asking to do a check? Should a DM never ask for a perception check? Just have the passive list and that's that?

Yuuki

It should be "you hear something behind that tree" "hmm, I'll take a closer look." "okay, roll a Perception check." It's just a semantic difference between the two, but the latter helps to avoid the whole "DM asked for a check, it has to be important" blunder.

Adam

16:50

I agree with you there. And I didn't mean to imply that I disagreed with the "DM's shouldn't call for a check" idea. But the way that sentence reads, somebody could interpret that as "A DM will never say the words 'roll a [skill] check' in the game" which is a sentiment that I don't necessarily share

Yuuki

@NautArch Asking for checks should be done in response with player prompting, imo.

Ability checks (rolls, that is) are supposed to represent player actions and so when a DM prompts the check instead of the player, that's taking decision making away from the player.

There are perhaps extenuating circumstances, but for the most part I don't believe ability checks should be a thing the DM prompts.

NautArch

@Yuuki that's a really interesting take. I'm wondering how many DMs/tables treat it like that. I don't disagree, it's just not how I've thought it works. I also kinda like it :)

although my table is often not playing with their full wits, and the hint of "you hear something rustling" may go no further without an ask for a roll.

Yuuki

That's actually exactly the situation I want to happen. With DM prompting, hearing something rustling always becomes an attempt to find the thing because the DM pre-empts the check. If there's player prompting, it can be ignored in which case it might turn out to be something or it might be nothing.

The Oracle

0

Q: What to do when a dupe has been marked, but is not really a duplicate?

A question on Passive Perception was posted today and was then closed as a dupe of this question. My concern is that the initial question (along with this question, which was also closed as a dupe of the Passive Perception Confusion question), are not duplicates of the Confusion question. Neit...

discussion

Yuuki

I think it can help to build tension/suspense.

NautArch

17:00

@Yuuki I agree. I'm just saying the subtle clues I give would go right over their impaired heads

subtle clues if passive was high enough, that is.

Yuuki

Yeah, I guess it kinda sucks for when you've crafted plot hooks that depend on players noticing subtle clues.

NautArch

@Yuuki yeah, i've learned not to do that :)

Adam

@NautArch I think that was the way that checks were intended to work

NautArch

@Adam The Passive presents clue to players to ask for active?

Adam

No, The ability checks not being a thing that the DM just calls for

As in DM's were never supposed to say "make me a perception check" when the players walk into a room and are awaiting your descriptions of what they see

NautArch

17:05

Ah - yeah. THe players is supposed to attempt and DM ask for the check.

we generally ask for rolls. but a lot of that time (with one of my DMs) it's mid-combat to notice new enemies.That should e passive, ut we generally don't use passive (also because passive is weird with proficiency die)

Yuuki

I imagine that I'll really hate Darkvision when I DM simply because there will be people without Darkvision and then I'll have to describe surroundings differently but it won't actually mean anything because the people without Darkvision will still hear the description the Darkvision people get.

NautArch

metagaming problems @Yuuki

same with rolls on knowing stuff about monsters.

unless trying to be stealthy, our assumption is the party tells the other members

unless a party member is eing a jerk. which happens. with one guy.

Yuuki

I mean, maybe this is what online gaming is better for since you can whisper stuff to other people, but that's just going to be hell on my fingers for typing.

I could describe it aloud for people without Darkvision since that's the baseline and then copy-paste whispers for people with Darkvision, I guess.

Can't imagine passing that many notes for an RL game though.

Zachiel

@Yuuki Don't pass notes, say it aloud, what it really affects is the ability to target some enemy in combat (because, remember, talking is a free action) (unless you're trying to be stealthy)

ACuriousMind

@Yuuki Do you really expect situations where the people who notice something different from the rest will not just blurt it out directly to the others? It seems a lot of effort for no actual impact on the game.

nitsua60

17:16

@Yuuki That's interesting--it's almost the exact opposite of how I read the system.

I see the class, background, spells, weapons, skills... that the player has chosen as statements to me "here are the things I'd like to do during the game."

Weapons, spells, RP... all of that the player can instigate on their own.

But their skills... by the rules they can't engage those. The GM has to call for the check.

Zachiel

@nitsua60 Urgh. Being D&D, I'd often see those4 as "those are things I think I will need to survive the game"

NautArch

@nitsua60 I don't think it really matters either way, but the PHB does say that a call for an ability check occurs when a character or monster attempts an action (other than attack) that has a chance of failure.

No attempt by player = no call for check

SevenSidedDie

@Zachiel It's both. D&D's design for characters unfortunately fails to give clear “flags” because build choices can mean opposite things.

(There's a great Deeper In The Game post, “Making Good Flags”, that addresses the concept overall, plus “trap non-flags” really nicely.)

(Though 5e is better, what with backgrounds and ideals, but backgrounds are still poor flags since they might be just getting chosen for the mechanical benefits.)

nitsua60

@NautArch Oh, sure, absolutely. I'm just saying that by the rules a player cannot say "I'd like to Athletics now."

So if Athletics is a thing the player has indicated they're interested in using, I should have my antannae up for chances to say "that sounds like a tough move... for most people. Can you make me a DC15 Athletics check?"

Zachiel

@SevenSidedDie Yes, that's what I was trying to signal.

SPavel

17:27

@SevenSidedDie That's a very odd article - it seems like the author wants the concept of flags to be mechanical and then veers off exclusively into fluff

Zachiel

@SPavel Well, not that unusual if the author is into games where the rules are about narration and not about world emulation.

SPavel

It's a good point that players should know how to implicitly communicate what their characters want (like how in a movie, it's rarely in doubt how a character feels about some goal or event)

@Zachiel "Always trust my brother" doesn't really seem like any kind of mechanic, even narration-wise

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel That's an example from the Burning Wheel, in which that kind of thing is actually mechanical.

Zachiel

By the way, I took a glance at the blog, it's Bankuei's, and he's really into that sort of games.

SevenSidedDie

There are lots of games that mechanise things that, from the perspective of D&D-like games, would seem to be mere fluff.

SPavel

17:30

But that doesn't really seem like a problem then

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel Problem?

SPavel

It's just a thing that already exists and he is describing it...whereas where I thought the whole thing was going was to use these flags to make more engaging games

by understanding what kind of conflicts PCs want to have happen

Zachiel

@SPavel Ah,I think I got it.

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel Naw, when “fluff” is actually mechanised, you have to get better at writing fluff. So “Making Good Flags” becomes a skill, no more or less a skill than say, build optimisation.

Zachiel

IMO it's not a problem in the game where that mechanic is from. It is a problem that the other game fails to use this kind of mechanics and, instead, has the "is this a flag or not?" question unsolved, like I was telling d7 above.

SPavel

17:33

I suppose the author just has different priorities that are different from mine, and therefore wrong

Zachiel

XD

SPavel

Also he is talking to players, while I think this is a concept better studied by GMs

SevenSidedDie

E.g. “Always trust my brother” is a good flag: it says “please mess with this assumption in the obvious way, which is making my brother untrustworthy at some point; this is where my character is vulnerable”. However, “I love my brother” is a terrible flag: it doesn't have an obvious “please do X” that it conveys. Do you want the brother to die, and mourn/revenge him? Do you want that love to be tested/broken? Do you want it to be asymmetrical? Do you want someone to come between you? Bad flag.

Zachiel

@SPavel Not every game puts the onus of making the game fun on a single person.

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel That last big message is how the article is player-facing. People who've played these games have run into the character-creation problem of how to write good material that clearly communicates their character's dramatic vectors.

Zachiel

17:35

(D&D 3e does)

SPavel

Naw, even in D&D one person can't make the difference between a fun game and a bad one

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel The DM?

Zachiel

@SPavel I don't say it can. I just say the DMG tells you that it is your role as the DM to do precisely that, (and if you fail at it you're a bad DM).

ShadowKras

> I could describe it aloud for people without Darkvision since that's the baseline and then copy-paste whispers for people with Darkvision, I guess.
is this a combat situation?

If so, wait until it's the turn of the character with darkvision to describe what they see

If it isn't, there is no issue in telling everyone what they see and assume they told the others.

SPavel

Good DMs don't read the DMG

ShadowKras

17:39

Just don't allow them to make perception checks to perceive things until they are close enough to actually see, such as searching for traps while not holding any kind of light.

Zachiel

@ShadowKras Sorry but, if that really was relevant, this wouldn't be a solution. Or rather, it's a problem even if the DM does exactly that, because there are still people unable to see in the area, and trying to gain vision over there is metagaming if the character with darkvision fails to communicate (say, if the character is silenced). You either need a lot of work, or to trust your players not to metagame.

ShadowKras

@SPavel good DMs read the DMG and realize that what those authors wrote is not that far from his experiences.

NautArch

@ShadowKras Then it's an initiative thing, when initiative is just there to help make the combat process flow more easily. Those events in a 6 second round happen simultaneously - why hobble the lower initiative PCs with information they should hvae?

Zachiel

I need to stop following this conversation I like and compile the spell list for my 18th level cleric, as I promised I would have done...

ShadowKras

@NautArch if you describe what the darkvision character sees, they do have the option to announce what they see or not. Normally my players just say "i tell them what i saw", since its their turn.

NautArch

17:42

@Zachiel or....we can help with that :P

ShadowKras

If they approach me with the intention of not declaring what they see, say, if their character has a secret agenda that others must not know. Then i will either hand out a note or send a whisper in private.

Zachiel

@ShadowKras Normally so. Some players are jerks. Some characters are silenced. Things happen, and D&D is not the best system to play if you don't like this kind of metamgaming, because it is doable but it requires work (notes in this case)

NautArch

@ShadowKras Yes, I think that's a very reasonable aspect. And one that one of my tablemates (who is also our DM for a long running campaign) often does. Mostly because he can be a jerk.

ShadowKras

Notes are never a bad idea. Any game with props is a win in my book.

Zachiel

@NautArch If and only if there's someone who won't try to get me to memorize spells that are not long-term buffs. XD

ShadowKras

17:43

Iv run an entire game where one of the PCs was a traitor entirely by handing out notes to everybody the entire session.

The look on their faces when they were poisoned and backstabbed was priceless. They were angry at the player at first, but later it became a good story to tell.

Zachiel

@ShadowKras Lucky for you to have players like that. In my group, it would have broken the group.

ShadowKras

Notes are also pretty good to get them paranoid.

NautArch

in that evil philosopher stone encounter i talked about yesterday, I was working with a player who was helping to orchestrate their fall. Well, the fall that didn't happen because they got all whiny about it.

ShadowKras

This one time i wrote down like...10 notes with random stuff that didn't really mean much. Like "your character notices that <this guy> is looking at you angry", or "you noticed that the fighter is always staring at you when you aren't looking".

This happened for about 2 sessions. In the end, they literally could not trust each other to hold the treasure.

SPavel

Fighter is just jealous of my sick abs

I roll a flex check

Yuuki

17:47

@SPavel Something something passive score.

Karelzarath

It's also entirely too amusing to pass a note asking for a skill check or save, then just nodding and pretending to write something when they pass it back.

ShadowKras

I mean, their character barely knew each other, and this was a dangerous setting (dark sun), so staring at each other, being afraid of sleeping when it's dark around people you barely know (who were ex-slaves or worse), etc, is all part of an *in-character* development.
This got them completely paranoid of each other.

Zachiel

afk for dinner, then shower, then choir rehearsal. Then maybe here again.

ShadowKras

@SPavel one character actually attempted to provoke the others to attack him so he could figure out what they really wanted. Like, he got mad at them, told them that they were jealous of his physical might, or mocked their "magical trickery".

SPavel

No reason to get mad when bros are 'mirin

Just give them tips on how to max their gains

rolls CHA check to persuade everyone to multiclass Barbarian

ShadowKras

17:52

@NautArch regarding the initiative. This is a playstyle issue. Do you allow people to speak freely when out of turn?

NautArch

@SPavel I believe it's spelled gainz

SPavel

@NautArch Yes but barbarians can't spell

NautArch

Hahaha

@ShadowKras we're inconsistent, which is annoying. But I think it should be fine as long as they aren't interrupting someone. But in combat, we often don't allow information to be shared like that and do a decent job self adjudicating.

ShadowKras

@NautArch me too. Since we are playing pathfinder lately, i try to enforce the "free actions on your turn" rule. When they are throwing random comments about the combat like "dude, stop missing your attacks" im fine. But when they have to share information, they have to wait until their turn to speak.

SPavel

Solution: fusion the party together then fission four separate people who each think and act exactly alike

ShadowKras

17:56

Sometimes they share information anyway, but i try to "persuade" them to not.

SPavel

Then all the OOC banter is justifiable

ShadowKras

Like, someone falls down to 0 hp and their character keeps directing or suggesting actions.

SPavel

(or permanent mindlink but whatever)

ShadowKras

@SPavel depending on the game, the banter is jusfitied (shadowrun).

SPavel

@ShadowKras This is actually a great way to have people play smarter/dumber characters than themselves - pool the intelligence of all players together, and then assign actions to characters based on their competence

Just because one character is out of the action doesn't mean that character's player can't play anymore

ShadowKras

17:57

Yes.

Which is why i allow it most of the time

NautArch

@ShadowKras yeah, if you're out, you're out. shuddup.

ShadowKras

like saying "hey, my character has 2 potions"

SPavel

The "master of warcraft" fighter's player might think Sun Tzu is a breed of dog

But the dead wizard's player can help steer him right

Karelzarath

@NautArch Or the quintessential "shut up, you're dead"

ShadowKras

But whenever they are discussing "should we go left, or go right" and the dead body starts suggesting directions, i say "dead bodies cannot talk".

NautArch

17:59

@ShadowKras unless it's a reattuned ring of mind shielding talking to the player :P

Karelzarath

@ShadowKras Nowhere in the rules does it say you can't talk while you're dead!

hides

ShadowKras

Oh don't start @Karelzarath, last time i had this conversation we realized that everybody is actually undead.

Karelzarath

lol!

SPavel

@Karelzarath Talking is an action, unconscious characters can't act, you are unconscious if your subdual damage exceeds your HP, when you are dead you have -10 HP and 0 subdual damage

Nobody is undead

SevenSidedDie

It's definitely an intentional foul, but we've decided it's worth it.

ShadowKras

18:00

and immortals.

SPavel

@SevenSidedDie When you die in this game you die in real life

SevenSidedDie

@SPavel Nightmare on Elm Street RPG

ShadowKras

Has anyone here played Dread?

SPavel

Also - pretty sure that killing and eating another player is at least a foul

Adam

@ShadowKras My cousin was telling me about it. We're trying to set up a game.

The Oracle

18:05

0

Q: Are we satisfied with the Info entry for the RAW Tag?

The rules-as-written tag has been a really contentious issue here. We have highly debated Questions related to the RAW tag's usage (What's it for?, Changing the approach, Keep it?, Rename it?), but not one regarding the RAW tag's Info page, itself. If we're happy with the current iteration, then...

discussion tags rules-as-written

ShadowKras

That tag deserves to be gone.

SPavel

I like the RAW tag

Yuuki

> nothing in the rulebook
> definitely an intentional foul

:thinkingface:

NautArch

@SPavel if 8 ever get a chance to play Savage worlds, my character may do that in the right circumstances

SevenSidedDie

@ShadowKras Not yet. Bought a Jenga set recently with it in mind though…

Zachiel

18:14

@Karelzarath My first session of D&D had that. After the DM had a god call thunder upon the ranger because the player kept interrupting descriptions (he also resurrected it when he was done. Which totally happened in-game.)

Or, as in a famous movie: "am I still unconscious?"

SPavel

"The cave is damp and dark, with a floor of jagged broken stones. Water drips somewhere in the distance, interrupted only by John's agonizing screams as he is electrocuted by Thor again. A gentle breeze wafts past you, as if beckoning you deeper into the cave..."

3

Zachiel

Something like that, only he was traveling by boat alone while we were doing a different thing. And now that I think about it, that was my second D&D game, not my first.

ShadowKras

Interrupters :(

SPavel

How did that joke go

"Knock knock"

"Who's the-" "Interrupting Horse"

Yuuki

> "Knock knock."
> "Rocks fall, everyone dies."

SPavel

18:22

My veil of geo-repulsion gives me +17 against falling rocks

Yuuki

But not on your passive score.

NautArch

@SPavel Moo!

(interrupting cow)

SPavel

Cow, that's the one

NautArch

Just taught that joke to my 5 year old

SPavel

I was thinking of a different, Russian joke, which never even made sense to me

MadMAxJr

19:09

I expressed an opinion on meta. Lets see how long it takes for me to be hit with the 'but you're wrong' stick. :D

Yuuki

@MadMAxJr You might even be hit with the butt end of the aforementioned stick.

diego

@MadMAxJr I'm pretty sure there is a joke somewhere in here about your answer being technically correct, but not really what the designers actually had in mind :)

MadMAxJr

META-RAW tag created

Yuuki

> The Deck of Mild Things
> Water: for the next 24 hours, your socks are wet. Any new socks you change to will also become wet.

doppelgreener

eimyr

19:16

Anyone wants to discuss game mechanics with me?

Yuuki

> Roses: Your breath smells lovely.

eimyr

I need smart, mechanically-minded people to bounce ideas off and get some feedback

MadMAxJr

The Deck of Responsible Adult Things: Death and Taxes - Battle a Minor Death or successfully complete a 1040 form for your character, choosing either the flat deduction or itemized deduction. Donations only count if the diety can vouch for you or you have a tax receipt.

SPavel

@Yuuki Death: For the next 24 hours, you are mildly unnerved by the inevitability of your own mortality

Adam

@doppelgreener It's so cute! I want it!

doppelgreener

19:19

@Adam You can have one! (Take good care of it though.)

Yuuki

> Gem: You stub your toe on a tiny piece of colored glass worth 1gp. Take 1 damage.

Adam

Thanks, but the better side of me knows that I shouldn't have a pet, at least not right now.

Yuuki

> Idiot: For the next 1d6 hour(s), you have a constant feeling of a word on the tip of your tongue but you just can't recall it.

SPavel

@Yuuki 1hp damage is enough to seriously maim many commoners

Yuuki

@SPavel Well maybe they shouldn't draw from the Deck of Mild Things.

> Moon: You are granted the ability to cast the wish spell 1d0 times.

SevenSidedDie

19:23

> Echolalia: For the next day, the word “echolalia” is stuck in your head.

SPavel

Bird: You may freely activate all magic items, but only those for which "Bird" is the command word

Yuuki

> The Void: You are filled with a sudden hunger for <particular food>. You are convinced that a random party member has <particular food>.

> Flames: Some Internet Tough Guy has become your enemy. The enmity lasts until (s)he posts a particularly viciously-worded message on a forum thread.

SPavel

Life: Your natural lifespan is extended by 1d3-2 rounds.

Adam

@SPavel So between 6 and -12 seconds?

eimyr

chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/37145592#37145592 I won't go quietly into the night! I will return!

Yuuki

19:29

> Vizier: At any point within the next year, you can ask a question.

Adam

@eimyr My experience is limited, but I will help as much as I can

SPavel

@Adam Either 6 seconds, 0 seconds, or -6 seconds

If you are lucky, you get to call an extra family member a giant dong before you snuff it

Unlucky, one fewer

Adam

@SPavel Ah! yes. I must need to devour another brain to do math better...

Yuuki

> Throne: The next meal you eat will go right through you.

eimyr

@Adam it's alright, thanks. I was just actually saying I can wait until there are people enthusiastically saying they waited all day for a topic like this :D

@Adam though, since you I got here: what do you think of rolling mathematically challenging rolls, like absolute(2d10- d20)

SPavel

19:33

@eimyr There's no reason to make a human do that

eimyr

there is!

NautArch

@eimyr what's the reasoning behind that?

Adam

@eimyr Seems needlessly complicated to me.

eimyr

this roll has such a sweet curve that I can't resist it

SPavel

5% chance of 0 and then half a bell curve

eimyr

19:34

it humps at 0 and gets almost like a 3dX curve from 5 to 20

MadMAxJr

The Deck of Many Mispelled Things

SPavel

anydice.com/program/b902

MadMAxJr

The Boid

The Furtress

eimyr

well, if you can give me an easier roll that does the same, I'd be very happy

SPavel

@eimyr 1dslapyourselfintheface

eimyr

19:35

@SPavel I got... five.

well, I could go with just half a bell curve from 0 to 20

SPavel

Try 999 more times to approximate the curve

eimyr

5... 5... 5... Are you sure this is random?

SPavel

The thing with random numbers is, you can never be sure.

Yuuki

71

A: What dice mechanic gives a bell curve distribution that narrows and increases mean as skill increases?

(SKILL+CONSTANT) dX, keep highest CONSTANT I don't know exactly the behavior you're going for, so there'll be a few arbitrary numbers in my example: skills can be ranked from 0 to 5 dice rolled are d12 ('cause I think they don't get enough love) we're going to keep highest 3 dice. In this ca...

SPavel

"a spectacular indication of the principle that each individual coin spun individually is as likely to come down heads as tails, and therefore should cause no surprise each individual time it does."

Adam

19:37

@SPavel Don't you have something like a 50% chance to get a result of 5 or less?

SPavel

@Adam I dunno, click my anydice link and count it

diego

@Adam According to anydice it is just over 56%

Adam

I mean, it just seems like this will likely shove all your numbers really low

eimyr

@Yuuki well, I'd say 4d10-20 is OK, but not necessarily any more user friendly

Adam

The curve looks cool, but I'm not convinced that it will necessarily perform in a fun way.

eimyr

19:44

well I could just roll 20dF

:P

diego

@eimyr How were you planning on using this distribution? Because I feel like a d100 with brackets like 1-5 = 0, 6-15 = 1, 16 - 25 = 2, etc. would work better. (it doesn't have the same precision, especially on the top end, but I don't know how much that would matter)

eimyr

it would certainly be fun to roll such a bucket

NautArch

@MadMAxJr wanna talk RAW?

SPavel

@eimyr Such bucket, many die, wow

Yuuki

@diego That's an even distribution, not the bell curve that I think he's going for.

Oh wait.

Misread some numbers, whoops.

eimyr

19:46

@diego I need the following things: 1) a positive-only roll with a moderately sharp bell curve 2) granularity of roll to twenty steps 3) reasonably low chance (<20%) of rolling >15

diego

@eimyr Do you want a real bell, or the half-bell your distribution has?

eimyr

@diego must have half-bell

nitsua60

@Yuuki I'm so glad someone saw that answer: it's one of my favorite posts =)

Karelzarath

@nitsua60 Forwarding that to my Pathfinder GM who likes to do 3d6 for skill rolls.

diego

@eimyr abs(3d10 - 11) gives a similar shape, but doesn't have you subtracting one variable from another so it is probably easier to do on the fly

SPavel

19:54

Ew, 3d6

nitsua60

@Karelzarath Because it's the inverse problem?

Karelzarath

@nitsua60 Because I think it better answers the problem he's trying to solve, namely that skill gets trumped by dice because of the flat probability of 1d20. I think the answer you gave is really what he's trying to accomplish.

ShadowKras

@nitsua60 that was a pretty good topic

nitsua60

@ShadowKras It was fun to think of, but I was super-busy that day, ended up being, like, the sixth answer, so super-lost the "fastest gun" dynamic =)

ShadowKras

I was one of the first to answer, and my answer was completely wrong.

Transcript for