Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 9 days agoDM Sadism 101 rulelemmy.dbzer0.comimagemessage-square25linkfedilinkarrow-up1428arrow-down11file-textcross-posted to: rpgmemes@ttrpg.network
arrow-up1427arrow-down1imageDM Sadism 101 rulelemmy.dbzer0.comViking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 9 days agomessage-square25linkfedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: rpgmemes@ttrpg.network
minus-squareHCSOThrowaway@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·9 days agoI don’t even think that should be limited to horror; I think that should be boilerplate standard across all tables. Nobody knows when they missed something important or they wouldn’t have missed it, by definition.
minus-squareSimon_Shitewood@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·9 days agoI see a lot of negative reactions to secret checks in PF2e online, but my players and I love them. It’s especially good when they all roll a secret check and the results mean I can give out conflicting information.
minus-squareHCSOThrowaway@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·9 days agoI suspect it’s that meta/power-gamers dislike taking away a meta tool to Win the Game.
I don’t even think that should be limited to horror; I think that should be boilerplate standard across all tables.
Nobody knows when they missed something important or they wouldn’t have missed it, by definition.
I see a lot of negative reactions to secret checks in PF2e online, but my players and I love them. It’s especially good when they all roll a secret check and the results mean I can give out conflicting information.
I suspect it’s that meta/power-gamers dislike taking away a meta tool to Win the Game.