I think it already has it. It's everything that comes after the DM says "What do you do?"D&D, as the biggest fish in the pond, probably ought to be expected to target "middle of the road" for most aspects of play. So, what's "middle of the road" for performance?
In D&D, every player has to invent something to say or do. There's no sequence of events and actions in the rulebook like you'd get playing Monopoly or Settlers of Catan that gives you your list of things you need to do in a specific order to take your turn-- and then once you completed those actions your turn was over. Instead, you have to "roleplay". You have to make something up. Sure, things like the Skill list can give you ideas of what you want to do... but even then the rules do not tell you the order in which Skills should be used, it's all based on the player's intuition of the story to figure out what Skill would make the most "in-game", "narrative" sense in reaction to what the DM described.
And I think this is where the discussion about "roleplaying" comes from. If we aren't giving players a defined sequence of events or mechanical actions to take on their turn like we would a board game or card game, and instead are asking them to invent an action that would apply to the situation "in the world's story"... it leads us in the same direction when it comes to the social aspect of the game. The DM essentially asking "What do you say?" instead of "What do you do?"
And a player can respond to that question however they want-- whether that's a 1st-person "in-voice" response as their character, a 3rd-person response of what the character is trying to get across, or even indeed I'm personally fine with the use of the Skill as part of that response if it helps get across their intention of how they want to accomplish it. "I roll Persuasion to get the guard..." has a different connotation than "I roll Intimidation to get the guard..." and that might be easier for a player to articulate their meaning and intention.
But in all cases, it still requires players to "improvise", rather than "follow the rules of the game" because the game doesn't include that and there's no "mini-game" for it-- no "verbal attack scores", no "resolve defense" no "emotional hit points" to reduce, etc. And while a person certainly could create a Social Combat system a la the game's weapon combat system... it always seem a bit superfluous, since everyone just keeps telling the DM what they are doing or saying anyway. So why not follow that lead and see where it goes? At least in my opinion.
Last edited: