Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7532113" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>For me, this is "back in the day". It's how I used the 1e AD&D reaction check (at least in part). I'd have go back and reread the 1e AD&D rules to see if that was the intention of the RAW, but the idea that you shouldn't let players get away with treating Charisma as a dump stat by having Charisma regularly and tangibly impact how the game proceeded is nothing new for me. If we are going to dispense with that, regardless of the edition, we should just get rid of Charisma completely and rely on player charisma.</p><p></p><p>I have evolved a little bit with respect to something like a 3e Diplomacy check. Players attempting diplomacy are not allowed to make the proposition, "I make a diplomacy check to get the NPC to help us." Under my procedures of play, that's treated as an invalid proposition, much as a PbtA based game would treat a proposition that couldn't be unambiguously resolved to a particular move. In order to be a valid social skill check, the player must describe what they say, preferably as a first person in character statement to the NPC. This is because the content of the statement matters, and because I prefer social encounters to be played out in a natural 'theatrical' style. (This preference could be stated to be "simulate the situation with the the least abstract resolution system practical".) This is a somewhat evolved position from how I ran 1e, when almost all RP was done by fiat making a reaction roll to set anything but initial disposition of an NPC that wasn't a follower/retainer/henchmen would have been rare, but does represent the direction I was going with 1e by say 1994 when I started wanting a skill system and started wanting to treat all characters equally rather than arbitrarily classifying them into PCs, NPCs, Henchmen, Retainers, Monsters, etc. with each having different rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7532113, member: 4937"] For me, this is "back in the day". It's how I used the 1e AD&D reaction check (at least in part). I'd have go back and reread the 1e AD&D rules to see if that was the intention of the RAW, but the idea that you shouldn't let players get away with treating Charisma as a dump stat by having Charisma regularly and tangibly impact how the game proceeded is nothing new for me. If we are going to dispense with that, regardless of the edition, we should just get rid of Charisma completely and rely on player charisma. I have evolved a little bit with respect to something like a 3e Diplomacy check. Players attempting diplomacy are not allowed to make the proposition, "I make a diplomacy check to get the NPC to help us." Under my procedures of play, that's treated as an invalid proposition, much as a PbtA based game would treat a proposition that couldn't be unambiguously resolved to a particular move. In order to be a valid social skill check, the player must describe what they say, preferably as a first person in character statement to the NPC. This is because the content of the statement matters, and because I prefer social encounters to be played out in a natural 'theatrical' style. (This preference could be stated to be "simulate the situation with the the least abstract resolution system practical".) This is a somewhat evolved position from how I ran 1e, when almost all RP was done by fiat making a reaction roll to set anything but initial disposition of an NPC that wasn't a follower/retainer/henchmen would have been rare, but does represent the direction I was going with 1e by say 1994 when I started wanting a skill system and started wanting to treat all characters equally rather than arbitrarily classifying them into PCs, NPCs, Henchmen, Retainers, Monsters, etc. with each having different rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
Top