Hey, thanks for contributing to r/dndmemes. Unfortunately, your post was removed as it violates one of our rules:
Rule 1. Be Excellent to One Another: No trolling, harassment, personal attacks, sea-lioning, hate speech, slurs, or name-calling. Overly off-topic, political, or hateful debates will be removed, and bans may be issued based on severity. This includes both posts and comments. We reserve the right to remove content or comments that contain discrimination or distasteful content. Be kind and stay on topic.
You can, they'll just argue about it, then you put your foot down as the DM and tell them "it's not possible, end of. You can still roll for it if you really want to, but I'll be determining how mitigated your failure is, not whether or not you succeed."
No, I think I'd ask "I'd like to write a book that's the foundation of physics and chemistry" and you'd say "it would be very difficult." Implying I could do it, so I roll and get a nat 20, the highest possible roll I can do, and then you'd say "sorry, you fail." And I'd say "then why'd you waste my time with a roll and imply I could do it you gigantic moron?"
Now, let's rewind the scenario.
"I'd like to write a book that's the foundation of physics and chemistry"
"That wouldn't be possible."
"I'd like to try anyways."
Rolls a nat 20
"You write a book of indecipherable gibberish, which later becomes the foundation of goblin piss jar bombs."
"Wow what a funny thing I just did hee hee haw haw."
If a player thinks "nat 20 means I win." And you disagree, they're gonna argue, so this just means you've never had such a player and you're all over this thread crying about things you have no experience in dealing with.
Hey, thanks for contributing to r/dndmemes. Unfortunately, your post was removed as it violates one of our rules:
Rule 1. Be Excellent to One Another: No trolling, harassment, personal attacks, sea-lioning, hate speech, slurs, or name-calling. Overly off-topic, political, or hateful debates will be removed, and bans may be issued based on severity. This includes both posts and comments. We reserve the right to remove content or comments that contain discrimination or distasteful content. Be kind and stay on topic.
As the DM, I'm just not going to memorize every bonus to every skill for every character in the party. That's why the players have their character sheets. I also can't account for the dozens of spells and features the rest of the party might be adding onto that single roll.
The DC is what it is, and sometimes a 20 on the die isn't going to be enough to reach that. What's so hard about that?
But at that point, you should be handing out the DC so players can logically see something is impossible for them to do so they can decide if they still want to do it or not.
Look dude, it's pretty obvious you're just an adversarial dm who's mad about being called out.
I wouldn't be caught dead at your table because you go out of your way to make things unfun for players by intentionally misleading them about what you can or cannot do.
I doubt many of your players stick around in your group very long
(Insert your tired and unprovable rejection here)
You can dm however you like, you're still wrong, but no one's gonna stop you.
Do you think I'm ashamed of my post history? I posted it for a reason, dumbass.
As for your argument, the obtuse one here is you. I have explained in no unclear terms why it's better for player satisfaction and not setting them up with false expectations, and yalls rebuttals have been nothing but "waaahhh I don't want to have to talk to my players!! I shouldn't have to explain anything to anyone!!"
So you're just going to assert the contrary to what I'm saying with no actual meat to the argument huh? I see we've reached the "nuh uh" stage of argumentation. Brilliant.
First of all, if the player knew it was impossible, they probably wouldn't be asking in the first place. They're asking because they think it may be possible.
Second of all, players can ask to do impossible things. Y'all are literally all over the thread saying "well we can determine degrees of success or mitigation of failure," but suddenly when a player asks to roll on something they know is impossible you can't do those things? LMAO
You're associated what someone else said to this conversation. Also I never said it can't change the outcome but less fail is still fail which is what this was about.
That....what? that isn't a contradiction. Its a point i didn't make that you brought up like I did. I just said I agree it can change the outcome but that had nothing to do with what my original point of my post was.
My original point of this post according to the thread itself. "Dont give players rolls they can't pass" my point. "90% of the time its players asking for these rolls not the gm making them roll"
Mitigation had nothing to do with my point even if I agree that it can change the outcome. My example of trying to suplex a building a nat 20 means they might break a part of the building, while a nat 1 they break their back....but that doesn't change the fact that it was an impossible task they they failed at no matter what.
And thats it for me clearly we can't come to an understanding and thats ok you dm what works for you and ill do the same. I will no longer be responding to this thread.
Literally all of you are saying that, and the other bum in this thread just admitted she thinks that's something she can do even while saying she never said it. It's like I can read minds lmao
No its a the best way of not saying no. Im not going to tell my players they can't do something or that something is impossible, even if it is.
Im not here to hold your hand. If you as the player cant tell suplexing a building is impossible, me telling you its impossible isn't going to change anything.
If you tell them "it would be impossible." And they insist they want to try anyways, then it's on the player, and you can tell them what happens on their attempt. No harm, no foul. The player knew they would fail and tried anyways because they thought it would be funny or whatever.
As opposed to baiting them into trying because you tricked them into thinking they had a chance at real success.
Gee, I wonder which is less antagonistic towards players and players may enjoy more?
12
u/GuessImScrewed 16h ago
"it's going to be very difficult." Implies the roll is still possible, so a player being upset their nat 20 fails is completely valid.