Fellow GMs, do you differentiate between a ‘4’ and a ‘5’ result?

Fellow GMs, do you differentiate between a ‘4’ and a ‘5’ result?

Fellow GMs, do you differentiate between a ‘4’ and a ‘5’ result?

I understand both are “you do it, with a consequence”, but do you treat the 4 as a worse consequence than the 5? My interpretation is no, that a 4 or 5 is just as good as each other, but thought I’d see how others ran it, and their experience.

On the same note, do you treat 1s as worse than 3s etc?

12 thoughts on “Fellow GMs, do you differentiate between a ‘4’ and a ‘5’ result?”

  1. Ben Liepis 😉 What I wanted to express was not that I don’t understand how the mechanics work, it’s that it doesn’t always feel relevant or natural for a 4-5 to be meaningfully different from a 6, and sometimes I just plain run out of “but” consequences. Like, sometimes things just happen or they don’t, and if there is any room for a complication, it isn’t interesting.

  2. Rebecca W, I feel ya. It can be taxing to think of things past pass/fail. At first, it was hard not to sweat future impact but I eventually said, “Fuck it!” and learned to run with my gut. I started just going with a little spice instead of fiddling too much. Still, there are times I go simple and say, “More Heat”. 😜

  3. Mark Cleveland Massengale I look at it this way: if there are stakes to failure, we need a roll- and, you make a good point that I often overlook; mixed results can just change the narrative positioning rather than the current outcome.

Comments are closed.