D&D 5E Persuade, Intimidate, and Deceive used vs. PCs

[iserith]

I have crossed no line by rolling that die and telling you that number that you didn't by describing him I took a different path to the same end and for gods sake STOP LIEING ABOUT ME TELLING PEOPLE HOW TO ACT!!!! I have told you repeatedly to stop I am asking one more time Please!!! Stop saying I tell my players how to act or what to do or what to think I DO NOT!!!

I'm asking this in all seriousness: Do you know what it means when you say "Your character is intimidated?" It means the character is cowed or afraid. That's not for the DM to decide in my view. I decide if the orc's war cry and axe-brandishing makes my character cowed or afraid, short of a magical effect.

I love how you go through a whole song and dance about how you feel but then try to shut down the topic so you have the last word...

I don't have any control over how or when the topic gets shut down. But some people do and my suggestion to take off-topic conversations to another thread is actually in service of preventing that. It has nothing to do with getting the last word, something I also have no control over since I can't prevent others from posting.

 

[JediGamemaster]

I do wonder... is there anyone here who actually take agency away from there players and tells them how to act or what to think?

I don't

 

[JediGamemaster]

I'm asking this in all seriousness: Do you know what it means when you say "Your character is intimidated?" It means the character is cowed or afraid. That's not for the DM to decide in my view. I decide if the orc's war cry and axe-brandishing makes my character cowed or afraid, short of a magical effect.

There is a major difference between "you think he is too big and bad and you run" and "He is intimidating you with a roll of 23" the fact that you can not separate the two astonishes me. It's almost like you have some big buggyman forcefull jerk of a DM built up in your mind and you stoped listening to the conversation and just keep having a fight with this imagined or previus DM instead of listening


I use skills in my game the way they are set up in the book. No one has yet shown me a rule that says "PCs only get to use these skills" no one has also shown me a rule that say "You do X or you think Y when intimidated" so my NPC is free to think and act when intimidated, and so is your PC...

 

[iserith]

There is a major difference between "you think he is too big and bad and you run" and "He is intimidating you with a roll of 23"

I can only go by what you have said and are saying.

Are you establishing that the NPC is intimidating to my character? Are you saying I'm intimidated?

If so, you are saying how my character acts and thinks.

I use skills in my game the way they are set up in the book. No one has yet shown me a rule that says "PCs only get to use these skills" no one has also shown me a rule that say "You do X or you think Y when intimidated" so my NPC is free to think and act when intimidated, and so is your PC...

I've never said that "PCs only get to use these skills." In fact, I've provided examples where I think monsters can take fictional actions with uncertain outcomes for which a Deception, Intimidation, or Persuasion check might be appropriate to resolve uncertainty. However, I do not think they should be rolled to resolve uncertainty when it comes to how a character will react to the monster's fictional action - that is for the player to decide. Thus there is no uncertainty and no roll.

 

[JediGamemaster]

I can only go by what you have said and are saying.

if that where true I wouldn't be repeating myself again... I DO NOT TELL MY PLAYERS WHAT TO DO THINK OR ACT...

Are you establishing that the NPC is intimidating to my character? Are you saying I'm intimidated?

I am rolling an intimidate check using the rules in the book the same as if I rolled an attack or a stealth check...

If so, you are saying how my character acts and thinks.

no I am saying how successful of a roll I am making...

I've never said that "PCs only get to use these skills." In fact, I've provided examples where I think monsters can take fictional actions with uncertain outcomes for which a Deception, Intimidation, or Persuasion check might be appropriate to resolve uncertainty. However, I do not think they should be rolled to resolve uncertainty when it comes to how a character will react

please look at that last word... react, I have said over and over they can react how they want I have never not in 20ish years had a player at my table think I was telling them how to react, I have never meet anyone even online before this thread who thinks I am telling people how to react, I have tried a dozen ways to explain it and you just stoped listening so lets try again "YOU GET TO DECIDE HOW YOU REACT TO THE NPC THE SAME EXACT WAY THE DM DECIDES HOW TO REACT TO YOUR PC"

that is for the player to decide. Thus there is no uncertainty and no roll.

the uncertainty is how good or bad he is at intimidating... if the orc has a +9 and I roll a 1 that is far less intimidating then if I roll a 9, and even more so if I roll a 20...

 

[iserith]

if that where true I wouldn't be repeating myself again... I DO NOT TELL MY PLAYERS WHAT TO DO THINK OR ACT...

I am rolling an intimidate check using the rules in the book the same as if I rolled an attack or a stealth check...

no I am saying how successful of a roll I am making...

please look at that last word... react, I have said over and over they can react how they want I have never not in 20ish years had a player at my table think I was telling them how to react, I have never meet anyone even online before this thread who thinks I am telling people how to react, I have tried a dozen ways to explain it and you just stoped listening so lets try again "YOU GET TO DECIDE HOW YOU REACT TO THE NPC THE SAME EXACT WAY THE DM DECIDES HOW TO REACT TO YOUR PC"

the uncertainty is how good or bad he is at intimidating... if the orc has a +9 and I roll a 1 that is far less intimidating then if I roll a 9, and even more so if I roll a 20...

I'll ask again:

Are you establishing that the NPC is intimidating to my character? Are you saying I'm intimidated?

Yes or no.

(And remember, I can go back and quote all the times you said those exact words in this thread.)

 

[JediGamemaster]

I'll ask again:

Are you establishing that the NPC is intimidating to my character? Are you saying I'm intimidated?

Yes or no.

(And remember, I can go back and quote all the times you said those exact words in this thread.)

you can go back all you want I have clarified multi times that I roll the intimidation skill and let the players react... yes they act intimidated because they are roleplaying....

SO lets try again... unless you are sitting at a table you can not say that a DM is forcing the PCs to think or act at all, when the DM tells you that he doesn't and you keep insisting that he is you are calling him a liar... stop insisting I am lying. I use the intimidate skill and the powers and spells of the edition, I run the game and the players run there character no one at any table (ongoing, one shot or con) has every complained that I am telling them what to do think or act... if all of my players for 20ish years don't think I am telling them how to think act or play and other people in this thread see it too... maybe you need to take a step back and admit that it might be you reading into this...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'll ask again:

Are you establishing that the NPC is intimidating to my character? Are you saying I'm intimidated?

Yes or no.

(And remember, I can go back and quote all the times you said those exact words in this thread.)

you can go back all you want I have clarified multi times that I roll the intimidation skill and let the players react... yes they act intimidated because they are roleplaying....

SO lets try again... unless you are sitting at a table you can not say that a DM is forcing the PCs to think or act at all, when the DM tells you that he doesn't and you keep insisting that he is you are calling him a liar... stop insisting I am lying. I use the intimidate skill and the powers and spells of the edition, I run the game and the players run there character no one at any table (ongoing, one shot or con) has every complained that I am telling them what to do think or act... if all of my players for 20ish years don't think I am telling them how to think act or play and other people in this thread see it too... maybe you need to take a step back and admit that it might be you reading into this...

you both need to calm down, but DAMN [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] I really think you are trying to push buttons at this point... I'm sure you would say I take control of my PCs too, but I think you need to rethink what is and isn't worth using that phrase for... I can't say I've meet anyone who would make that claim in real life either... I may not use the skills (PC or NPC) all the time, and have been in games were we totally just rp it (sometimes good sometimes not) I do think you could totally play any character at [MENTION=6802285]JediGamemaster[/MENTION]'s table... I can't imagine you really getting up after wards and saying "Hey, when you rolled that 15 skill check I think you should have just described it instead of rolling" in fact if it didn't happen at the end of the night you might not even remember it

 

[iserith]

you can go back all you want I have clarified multi times that I roll the intimidation skill and let the players react... yes they act intimidated because they are roleplaying....

SO lets try again... unless you are sitting at a table you can not say that a DM is forcing the PCs to think or act at all, when the DM tells you that he doesn't and you keep insisting that he is you are calling him a liar... stop insisting I am lying. I use the intimidate skill and the powers and spells of the edition, I run the game and the players run there character no one at any table (ongoing, one shot or con) has every complained that I am telling them what to do think or act... if all of my players for 20ish years don't think I am telling them how to think act or play and other people in this thread see it too... maybe you need to take a step back and admit that it might be you reading into this...

Yes, you roll an ability check. Yes, you tell the players what the result of that ability check is.

Do you tell them the monster is intimidating to them? Do you tell them their character is intimidated?

This isn't about whether your players like what you're doing or not. I take you at your word that they do. I'm trying to explain to you how it is that you are, in fact, telling a player how his or her character thinks or acts if you answer "Yes" to either of the questions above. If the answer is "No," then that's a reversal on a previous position and you are not telling a player how his or her character thinks or acts - at least not by those words.

So which is it?

 

[iserith]

you both need to calm down, but DAMN [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] I really think you are trying to push buttons at this point...

I am calm and I do not seek to push buttons. I asked a couple of simple questions that are being evaded, questions that will get to the bottom of a long discussion.

I'm sure you would say I take control of my PCs too, but I think you need to rethink what is and isn't worth using that phrase for... I can't say I've meet anyone who would make that claim in real life either... I may not use the skills (PC or NPC) all the time, and have been in games were we totally just rp it (sometimes good sometimes not) I do think you could totally play any character at [MENTION=6802285]JediGamemaster[/MENTION]'s table... I can't imagine you really getting up after wards and saying "Hey, when you rolled that 15 skill check I think you should have just described it instead of rolling" in fact if it didn't happen at the end of the night you might not even remember it

It's not about rolling ability checks for monsters. It's about the DM establishing what a character thinks, says, or does. I would take issue with that. A player gets exactly one-third of the basic conversation of the game. The DM doesn't need to start intruding on what little the player has control over in my view.