Skills used by players on other players.

Sacrosanct · Dec 10, 2018

iserith said:
The DM can only call for an ability check when there's uncertainty as to the outcome of a task. The task here is "Convince barbarian to go along with rogue's plan." Players can't call for or decide to make ability checks.

The question is whether there is uncertainty as to the outcome of the task. And the answer is: There isn't. A player determines how the character thinks and acts - thus the outcome is whatever the player of the barbarian says it is. With the outcome being known, there is no uncertainty, and the DM therefore cannot call for an ability check to resolve this matter.

That's just your opinion. Mine (and others) for example, would be "this is a role playing game, and role playing means to play your character as if they were a living actual being, which includes things like intelligence and wisdom." In that case, then it very well is reasonable and justified to make a roll like you would with any other persuasion check in the game.

Some people ignore role playing aspects and don't force players to play their character like an idiot if they have an INT of 6, while other groups do. Your position is hardly objectively the one true answer. Not saying mine is either, but that since it's subjective and a matter of opinion, making rolls is a legitimate way.

iserith · Dec 10, 2018

Sacrosanct said:
That's just your opinion. Mine (and others) for example, would be "this is a role playing game, and role playing means to play your character as if they were a living actual being, which includes things like intelligence and wisdom." In that case, then it very well is reasonable and justified to make a roll like you would with any other persuasion check in the game.

Some people ignore role playing aspects and don't force players to play their character like an idiot if they have an INT of 6, while other groups do. Your position is hardly objectively the one true answer. Not saying mine is either, but that since it's subjective and a matter of opinion, making rolls is a legitimate way.

My opinion is informed by the rules of the game which I paraphrased in my response. You don't have to follow the rules, of course, but those of us who share my opinion are following the rules.

Henry · Dec 10, 2018

Sacrosanct said:
However, it's a player issue, not a game issue at all. Part of me wants to say, "If you don't want your barbarian to be persuaded, then don't use INT and WIS as your dump stat." Stat allotment is all about deciding risks vs rewards in what you want. Either way, there's nothing in the game itself that's at issue here. It's the behavior of the players that's causing the issues

The part of that argument "don't dump stat X if you want Y" really doesn't hold water where 5e is concerned. It's not like Pathfinder where the person who is completely unprepared has a +12 difference from the person who optimized, and you could have had a chance to improve your insight check over several levels if you wanted to. The barbarian has all of one chance to take a feat over every 4 levels to improve a skill, even then it's by a +2 or +3. Thanks to bounded accuracy, you could have a +4 or 5 in your insight, and still lose to the suave talker (or vice versa). It's not about planning, it's about dice whims. My clerics with +6 Wisdom saves at 4th level have rolled enough 2s and 5s on saving throws for me to know this.

...Then again, the average gamer doesn't go into a game expecting to have to defend themselves from fellow party members ensorcelling them, either.

I'm a firm believer in the player contract, and if I've made a ruling that actually causes one of my sane, rational players* to be genuinely pissed off at me, then I know I need to back up and re-think my approach. On the other hand, if I'm the only one who turns out feeling that way, then it's probably time to find another group, because my expectations of a good game probably don't line up with theirs.

*Player as opposed to PC; PCs at my table are pissed off at their odds all the time, but I'm careful to make sure that the person is having a blast.

Sacrosanct · Dec 10, 2018

iserith said:
My opinion is informed by the rules of the game which I paraphrased in my response. You don't have to follow the rules, of course, but those of us who share my opinion are following the rules.

No, actually, it's you who isn't following the rules. Your position "A player determines how the character thinks and acts" is dependent on not following the rules, because it depends on ignoring the rules, specifically INT and WIS and CHA stats. Ability scores are part of the rules. And since your position is that the player decides how their PC acts regardless of what those stats are, then it's you who is not following the rules and guidelines.

I gotta admit, it's strange for me to hear that my position of using existing rules and guidelines for resolution based on ability scores is me "choosing not to follow the rules." It's literally the opposite.

iserith · Dec 10, 2018

Sacrosanct said:
No, actually, it's you who isn't following the rules. Your position "A player determines how the character thinks and acts" is dependent on not following the rules, because it depends on ignoring the rules, specifically INT and WIS and CHA stats. Ability scores are part of the rules. And since your position is that the player decides how their PC acts regardless of what those stats are, then it's you who is not following the rules and guidelines.

I gotta admit, it's strange for me to hear that my position of using existing rules and guidelines for resolution based on ability scores is me "choosing not to follow the rules." It's literally the opposite.

A player determining how the character thinks and acts is the definition of roleplaying provided by the rules themselves. We didn't just make that up. There are also no rules that require a player to act any particular way given their ability scores. The character creation guidelines do suggest that ability scores can inform the PC's appearance and personality, but there are no hard rules on how to play characters according to particular scores.

Sacrosanct · Dec 10, 2018

Henry said:
The part of that argument "don't dump stat X if you want Y" really doesn't hold water where 5e is concerned. It's not like Pathfinder where the person who is completely unprepared has a +12 difference from the person who optimized, and you could have had a chance to improve your insight check over several levels if you wanted to. The barbarian has all of one chance to take a feat over every 4 levels to improve a skill, even then it's by a +2 or +3. Thanks to bounded accuracy, you could have a +4 or 5 in your insight, and still lose to the suave talker (or vice versa). It's not about planning, it's about dice whims. My clerics with +6 Wisdom saves at 4th level have rolled enough 2s and 5s on saving throws for me to know this.

...Then again, the average gamer doesn't go into a game expecting to have to defend themselves from fellow party members ensorcelling them, either. I'm a firm believer in the player contract, and if I've made a ruling that actually causes one of my sane, rational players* to be genuinely pissed off at me, then I know I need to back up and re-think my approach. On the other hand, if I'm the only one who turns out feeling that way, then it's probably time to find another group, because my expectations of a good game probably don't line up with theirs.

*Player as opposed to PC; PCs at my table are pissed off at their odds all the time, but I'm careful to make sure that the person is having a blast.

BA does make it less of an issue, I agree.

And as I mentioned in my initial reply, I absolutely agree that the player broke the unspoken social contract. I guess my point is that this is not a game issue, or a DM fiat issue. Fiat literally means to make an arbitrarily edict or decree. A DM making a ruling or calling for a check is not fiat. Disagreeing with a DM is not fiat. The arbitrary edict part is important. And if a DM is using established rules and guidelines to form the resolution, that is the opposite of what fiat means.

And for the record, I have zero issues with people choosing to ignore rules if it infringes on their fun. Lots of people do it. We do it with some things (like the weapon v armor table in 1e). But don't say you're following the rules when you choose to ignore your PC's INT, WIS, CHA, or how rules on how to mechanically resolve conflicts, or anything else that's part of the rules. I'd even go so far as to say that the vast majority of players don't play their PCs with super low CHA as very off-putting, or very low INT as dumb. Especially players who struggle with immersive role playing. I want to make it clear that I'm not saying doing so is a bad thing in any way.

Sadras · Dec 10, 2018

It is important to note that a character having low scores of INT, WIS or CHA doesn't necessarily mean the character is any less stubborn or that he might even listen to reason and may instead push his agenda due to ego or for any other reason (bribery or coercion).

In Rise of Tiamat, there is a tiefling sorcerer, Maccath the Crimson, that is available for rescue from a large white dragon. The AP states that Maccath will not assist the adventurers in combat against the dragon due to x reasons. So despite the characters being proficient in the skill Persuade, the AP never permitted that as a viable option, which is fair.

EDIT: Having said that, if the PC agrees that a strong argument would succeed in him/her relaxing his/her PoV and going along with the other's idea, then I would expect the player to have his/her character follow through with the result of the die roll. Should additional issues/circumstances in the fiction arise that materially alter the original arrangement/agreement then ofcourse the persuaded PC can change his/her position. No save or such nonsense required.

Sacrosanct · Dec 10, 2018

iserith said:
A player determining how the character thinks and acts is the definition of roleplaying provided by the rules themselves.

Your position was that a player decides how their PC acts and thinks independent of stats. That is not following the rules because it is ignoring and overriding the rules. specifically stat values and the rules around resolution (like saving throws and ability checks). A PC with an INT of 6 is going to think differently than a character with an INT of 18. Those values are important because they guide us as players in how to role play the PC. Choosing to arbitrarily ignore those and play your PC however you want is not wrong (see the above post re: having fun), but it does in fact ignore the rules.

There are also no rules that require a player to act any particular way given their ability scores.

Yes there are, by the very definition of what those stats mean, and what the values of those stats represent. I mean, "charisma" has a definition. And the value of that attribute means something, and tells you how your character comes off to others. That's literally a rule/guideline telling you as a player how to act. What there are no rules for, is a rule that states "ability checks and saving throws no longer apply if it's another PC initiation the challenge." If I missed it, feel free to point out where it says that in the books. Those skill checks are there for a reason. If players always got to choose how they thought and acted, then why are there even certain skill checks to begin with?

Blue · Dec 10, 2018

Ovinomancer said:
I'ts already been pointed out. The player determines what his character thinks.

And it's also been pointed out and had a whole post explaining in a high level of detail that people focusing on the word "thinks" in order to avoid what is very obvious a question about skill usage are missing the point.

Guest 6801328 · Dec 10, 2018

Sacrosanct said:
That's just your opinion. Mine (and others) for example, would be "this is a role playing game, and role playing means to play your character as if they were a living actual being, which includes things like intelligence and wisdom." In that case, then it very well is reasonable and justified to make a roll like you would with any other persuasion check in the game.

Some people ignore role playing aspects and don't force players to play their character like an idiot if they have an INT of 6, while other groups do. Your position is hardly objectively the one true answer. Not saying mine is either, but that since it's subjective and a matter of opinion, making rolls is a legitimate way.

I'll try to not reciprocate by denigrating your favored playstyle, but as has been pointed out many, many, many times...ad nauseam...there are many different wants of "playing a character" that count as roleplaying. I think yours is just as inferior as you think mine is.

So let's just drop that line of attack...I mean argument...ok?

Rolls are required to resolve uncertainty. If I try to persuade an NPC and the DM thinks "that's just not gonna happen" then there's no uncertainty and no roll is required.

If an NPC or PC tries to persuade my character and I think "that's just not gonna happen" then there's no uncertainty and no roll is required.

Now, that MAY be bad roleplaying...it depends on a LOT of things (of which Int and Wis are just two tiny pieces)...but it's not by bad roleplaying by definition. In fact, it's just as likely to be bad roleplaying as is following dice results, as has been pointed out.

You can certainly play the game in other ways if you choose, but a discussion of that probably doesn't belong in a 5e thread because it's not 5e.

Skills used by players on other players.

Sacrosanct

Legend

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

Henry

Autoexreginated

Sacrosanct

Legend

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

Sacrosanct

Legend

Sadras

Legend

Sacrosanct

Legend

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Guest 6801328

Guest

Similar Threads