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 LIVE! 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
Social interactions in 4E
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="Mallus" data-source="post: 3742573" data-attributes="member: 3887"><p>That's not really what I meant by meant, but then, I suspect I wasn't being very clear.</p><p></p><p>When DM'ing, I place a really high value on player participation/the play around the table. I don't want characters sitting out of social encounters because they have a low mechanical chance for producing a successful outcome. If the player of a low CHA PC delivers a rousing real-life speech that wows the whole table, more often than not, I'll let that decide the outcome. I don't want to discourage, or at least render inconsequential, that kind of live play. I much prefer to render (occasionally) the character's abilities inconsequential, or at least overlook them.</p><p></p><p>And I'm not sure I understand why social mechanics would encourage the inclusion of social encounters. I've always found that it's strictly a taste issue. I run a lot of social, or at least combat optional encounters because I enjoy them; the robustness --or even the presence-- of social resolution mechanics isn't a factor. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Then there's no getting around that some people will want to play characters they can't. Replacing 'talking' with the 'talking game' won't change that, or at least I don't see how it would. Whatever resolution system is in place, someone will be bad at it. </p><p></p><p></p><p>For the record, you sound like neither 1) and elitist or 2) a jerk. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Understand where I'm coming from. Most (but not all) of the social encounters in the games I play in are resolved using negotiation/fiat. The exact words the player's speak come out of their characters mouths. They're natural sounding conversations between the players and DM, peppered with non-mechanical metagame talk. </p><p></p><p>I didn't mean to suggest that the use of social mechanics would eliminate roleplaying, just the they would change the timbre of it. And I based that off your example of the Duel of Wits (gotta say, Lost Souls sample sounded a lot smoother/cooler). I still have concerns that by explicitly turning conversation into a tactical game (which is is already, implicitly) it'll lessen it somehow. </p><p></p><p>Frankly, I don't see how much more immersive you can get then speaking the exact words your character is speaking, and having said words resolve the encounter, though I am game to try different systems...</p><p></p><p></p><p>You know, I really am in total agreement here. I'm not opposed to social mechanics. I use the fairly poor ones included in 3.5 myself. But I'm opposed to the idea that those kinds of rules represent some kind of panacea for problems posed by shy players and obstinate, unresponisve DM's.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mallus, post: 3742573, member: 3887"] That's not really what I meant by meant, but then, I suspect I wasn't being very clear. When DM'ing, I place a really high value on player participation/the play around the table. I don't want characters sitting out of social encounters because they have a low mechanical chance for producing a successful outcome. If the player of a low CHA PC delivers a rousing real-life speech that wows the whole table, more often than not, I'll let that decide the outcome. I don't want to discourage, or at least render inconsequential, that kind of live play. I much prefer to render (occasionally) the character's abilities inconsequential, or at least overlook them. And I'm not sure I understand why social mechanics would encourage the inclusion of social encounters. I've always found that it's strictly a taste issue. I run a lot of social, or at least combat optional encounters because I enjoy them; the robustness --or even the presence-- of social resolution mechanics isn't a factor. Then there's no getting around that some people will want to play characters they can't. Replacing 'talking' with the 'talking game' won't change that, or at least I don't see how it would. Whatever resolution system is in place, someone will be bad at it. For the record, you sound like neither 1) and elitist or 2) a jerk. Understand where I'm coming from. Most (but not all) of the social encounters in the games I play in are resolved using negotiation/fiat. The exact words the player's speak come out of their characters mouths. They're natural sounding conversations between the players and DM, peppered with non-mechanical metagame talk. I didn't mean to suggest that the use of social mechanics would eliminate roleplaying, just the they would change the timbre of it. And I based that off your example of the Duel of Wits (gotta say, Lost Souls sample sounded a lot smoother/cooler). I still have concerns that by explicitly turning conversation into a tactical game (which is is already, implicitly) it'll lessen it somehow. Frankly, I don't see how much more immersive you can get then speaking the exact words your character is speaking, and having said words resolve the encounter, though I am game to try different systems... You know, I really am in total agreement here. I'm not opposed to social mechanics. I use the fairly poor ones included in 3.5 myself. But I'm opposed to the idea that those kinds of rules represent some kind of panacea for problems posed by shy players and obstinate, unresponisve DM's. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Social interactions in 4E
Top