Am 27-Feb-2016 12:01:34 +0100 schrieb xxxxxx@port.ac.uk:

Anyway, how legitimate is it for a player to query what difficulty level a task was?  I don't tend to say what they are aiming it (is that usual?) but was a bit taken aback to have a (failed) task queried as to how difficult it was.  In my head I had a pretty clear idea of the difficulties involved (not all of which were obvious to the PC).  But should I be more open with the player about what they're aiming at?

 

If not, how legitimate is it to fudge this in any case to get the outcome you want (or would help the adventure along)?

 

t "newbie referee" c

 

Well, YMMV, but my rule of thumb was: physical tasks (including combat) within the PC's field of expertise: give them all the info; interpersonal tasks or those where the PC is not an expert: ask them to roll, but do not tell them the exact task difficulty, just than whether it is an attribute check (so that they want to roll low) or a task (so that they want to roll high), and the attributes and skills involved. Sometimes not even that. In my experience, players are usually happy to be a bit uncertain about interpersonal stuff, as long as they feel in control regarding combat, repairs, and the like.

 

My own approach when asked about task details in FTF sessions (notice the "was" there...it's been a while) and I did not want those to be public was to offer players to switch to roll-playing, that is, specify ALL tasks clearly before rolling. Meaning the referee would not be able to fudge any roll in the PC's favour... they usually got the hint.

 

Other than that, the old "Sorry, there is information you don't have" while you quickly put a worried face and make a new roll behind the screen can be pretty effective too <grin>.


--
Carlos Alós-Ferrer
Chair of Microeconomics, University of Cologne
http://www.decisions.uni-koeln.de