Skills used by players on other players.

[GameOgre]

You said "Players are less likely to out and out ignore something if they had to make a check for it."

The DM is the one who calls for checks, so this has the look of the DM caring about whether the players have their characters act deceived, persuaded, or intimidated by a fellow PC.

Why care about that at all as DM?

Because if players are not going to role play at all.. There are a TON of better games to be playing.

If you want Fantasy without role playing go play Skyrim or World of Warcraft. MUCH BETTER games if you don't want to role play.

Really all tabletop rpg's have over those other games is role playing. You can't log onto World of Warcraft and role play with anyone else. Even on video games with role playing servers....it just doesn't happen.

I have actually said this to players. Seriously, if your not here to role play at all, stop showing up. Go play w.o.w. with me at night or grab Skrim it's a awesome game. Jut do something else.....I would rather not have you at my table.

 

[iserith]

Because if players are not going to role play at all.. There are a TON of better games to be playing.

They are roleplaying though - determining how their characters act, think, and talk. The player determined that his barbarian character wasn't convinced by the rogue character's argument. That's roleplaying.

 

[GameOgre]

They are roleplaying though - determining how their characters act, think, and talk. The player determined that his barbarian character wasn't convinced by the rogue character's argument. That's roleplaying.

The fact that that IS role playing to you, means a lot. Making up your characters mind despite the entire world around them is rarely role playing. Role playing is playing a character and REACTING to the outside influences going on around you.

 

[GameOgre]

Thanks everyone for the awesome posts. You gave me a lot to think about. The matter is resolved to my satisfaction but we will see how it goes.

 

[iserith]

The fact that that IS role playing to you, means a lot.

It's how the rules of the game you're playing defines "roleplaying" as well. I didn't just make up that definition.

Making up your characters mind despite the entire world around them is rarely role playing. Role playing is playing a character and REACTING to the outside influences going on around you.

So the rogue makes a case to help the villagers. The barbarian hears him out and decides he doesn't want to do that. Is that not "reacting to the outside influences going on around you?"

Let me ask you this, out of curiosity: Did they go help the villagers ultimately? Was this your hook for the adventure and, if so, does that mean you had a stake in the barbarian going to help them?

 

[FrogReaver]

Oh sure. Just because the rogue convinced him to help doesn't mean he is forced to do whatever the bard wanted. Maybe he considered the villagers horrible and they will betray the party and while his good hearted friend fell for there tricks the barb isn't about to. Maybe he does something else to help his friend,he might even be right! Maybe he leaves and hurries to find the rest of the party to tell them what the stupid bard got up to so they can come back and save him, maybe he instead goes to find the other barbarians camped outside of town to get them to save the soft townspeople. Maybe he does join in and help the bard but keep a eye on whats going on and be ready.....or whatever else the Player of the barbarian thinks his character would do.

If that's all you expected to happen then that's reasonable. I'm curious as to what gave it away that the barbarian wasn't doing those things? What I had read up till now was that the one PC tried to persuade him to do X and had a successful check and that the barbarian refused to go along with the plan. How do you know that his refusal to go along wasn't him roleplaying out something similar to one of the above options?

That's the only part I'm still hung up on.

 

[GameOgre]

If that's all you expected to happen then that's reasonable. I'm curious as to what gave it away that the barbarian wasn't doing those things? What I had read up till now was that the one PC tried to persuade him to do X and had a successful check and that the barbarian refused to go along with the plan. How do you know that his refusal to go along wasn't him roleplaying out something similar to one of the above options?

That's the only part I'm still hung up on.

The Player said"yeah i don't care, I don't want to do that. who gives a #$#$ about this village? I want to go get some xp from that dungeon we left last week." When the player of the rogue started to talk to him in character he said"No XP in that crap man".

When I forced him to react in character he was outright hostile. Really I think he just was having a bad day. It happens. He was having a rough week at work I think.

Let me ask you this, out of curiosity: Did they go help the villagers ultimately? Was this your hook for the adventure and, if so, does that mean you had a stake in the barbarian going to help them?

I do not run adventures. It's a do whatever you want type of game. Sure I might have Storms King Thunder as a backdrop and if the pc's want to get involved then i would be game, however i'm actually much more comfortable with the pc's doing whatever floats their boat.

No the party did not help the village BUT....the barbarian was right. The villagers hand been infiltrated by a evil cult and although many innocent villagers did end up dying the party would have been double crossed at some point because the Ogre/giant invasion was planned out by the cult who would have tried to make sure the pc's were eliminated before they could interfere.

Now instead there is a growing Giant Power allied with a evil cult in that region. Actually only about 40 miles away from the home village of the Barbarian.....

 

[Mouseferatu]

Well, now I'm torn.

On the one hand, AFAIAC, it is never, ever okay to tell a player how their character must react to something unless magic is involved.

On the other, I have zero use for anyone who replies to an in-character argument, or makes an in-character decision, based on out-of-character issues like "Where can I find the most XP?"

So, I dunno. I'm kind of opposed to everyone involved at this point.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well, now I'm torn.

On the one hand, AFAIAC, it is never, ever okay to tell a player how their character must react to something unless magic is involved.

On the other, I have zero use for anyone who replies to an in-character argument, or makes an in-character decision, based on out-of-character issues like "Where can I find the most XP?"

So, I dunno. I'm kind of opposed to everyone involved at this point.

It's amazing what different reactions a person get's when all the details are shared.

 

[Oofta]

The Player said"yeah i don't care, I don't want to do that. who gives a #$#$ about this village? I want to go get some xp from that dungeon we left last week." When the player of the rogue started to talk to him in character he said"No XP in that crap man".

When I forced him to react in character he was outright hostile. Really I think he just was having a bad day. It happens. He was having a rough week at work I think.



I do not run adventures. It's a do whatever you want type of game. Sure I might have Storms King Thunder as a backdrop and if the pc's want to get involved then i would be game, however i'm actually much more comfortable with the pc's doing whatever floats their boat.

No the party did not help the village BUT....the barbarian was right. The villagers hand been infiltrated by a evil cult and although many innocent villagers did end up dying the party would have been double crossed at some point because the Ogre/giant invasion was planned out by the cult who would have tried to make sure the pc's were eliminated before they could interfere.

Now instead there is a growing Giant Power allied with a evil cult in that region. Actually only about 40 miles away from the home village of the Barbarian.....

This is one reason I don't give XP any more and do more of my own home-brew kind-of check point advancement. Even when I did give XP, I'd give it for all sorts of non-combat encounters as long as it kept the story moving (whether or not it was moving in the direction I had intended didn't always matter).

Removing the direct connection between XP and killing things might help.