D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Charlaquin]

then what is the argument you are making? We read the rule diffrent, we see the game diffrent but for the most part we still play the same.

I’m not sure we do…

 

[Maxperson]

For the love... if you have done so, then link to them. Or quote them. Or copy & paste them as a response.
We ALL can't possibly be missing ALL your rules quotes and page references annotated with your interpretation. So something else must be going on here, yes?

All of his evidence seems to be that a lack of no = yes, which is a logical failure. He doesn't have any specific contradictions to show us, because none exist.

 

[iserith]

you are just making stuff up now.

the roll determains how good the npc/monster is at a skill... just like an arcana check.

so the book helps you set the DC, this is one of the rules I do not like and as such DO HOUSE RULE, so I am no help at RAW setting DCs.

it is only meaningless if you ignore that it is the ingame ability of X to do Y

and I think you are more interested in arguing then listening. You can dislike my reading of the rules, just don't pretend I am NOT reading the rules.

and you could start doing it today with no change. (unless you can show me some example where the end result is different)

No, an ability check determines whether or not an action is successful when the outcome is uncertain and there's a meaningful consequence for failure. Those are the rules of the game.

The difference between a monster trying to intimidate a PC and a monster trying to recall lore about some arcane subject should be obvious in my view: The attempt to intimidate doesn't have an uncertain outcome because the player gets to say what happens in the face of the intimidation. Thus, no roll. The attempt to recall lore could be uncertain, if the DM decides it is, and thus there may be an ability check here.

I have read every one of your posts. I neither like nor dislike your reading of the rules. But what is very obvious is that your reading takes some rules into account, ignores others, and then makes logical leaps that don't follow in what appears to be an attempt at defending a preference that doesn't actually need defending.

 

[Charlaquin]

post 189

Page 179:
"Persuasion. When you attempt to influence someone or a group of people with tact, social graces, or good nature, the DM might ask you to make a Charisma (Persuasion) check. Typically, you use persuasion when acting in good faith, to foster friendships, make cordial requests, or exhibit proper etiquette. Examples of persuading others include convincing a chamberlain to let your party see the king, negotiating peace between warring tribes, or inspiring a crowd of townsfolk."

It seems to completely be consistent with a PC trying to persuade another PC and the DM then might call for a check.

Yes, the DM might ask you to make a check. However, there are also general rules for when the DM should ask for a check (specifically, when the outcome of the action is uncertain), which this quotation does not explicitly contradict.

 

[HammerMan]

logically valid

as long as you think that trump card means something, when I have told you repeateldy I am useing common language reading you might as well be sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling

 

[HammerMan]

I’m not sure we do…

then show me an end result diffrence. do you want me to repost the examples of play?

 

[iserith]

Ultimately, it's just a bit of sharing of the DM's responsibilities because rolling the NPC's social skill checks and having the player adjudicate success essentially puts the player in the DM's role. From that perspective, the method conforms reasonably well to the rules.
I don't know that declaring that doing so isn't supported by the rules is a horse worth beating to death.

I certainly know what this approach is doing (badly in my view), but to say it conforms to the rules is not a defensible position as I see it. And in that situation, the better move is to abandon the position with the knowledge that it's totally okay to house/table rule things in D&D! Nobody will say otherwise.

As to why continue discussing it, it's to refine and test my own arguments and give others some good and useful tools that make the game easier to run for both DMs and players. I know there's absolutely no convincing anyone who is entrenched, particularly those who have some kind of emotional investment. My responses aren't aimed at convincing them to change.

 

[HammerMan]

No, an ability check determines whether or not an action is successful when the outcome is uncertain and there's a meaningful consequence for failure. Those are the rules of the game.

no matter how many times you cut nd paste this aruement it is not going to end this discussion.

I have read every one of your posts. I neither like nor dislike your reading of the rules. But what is very obvious is that your reading takes some rules into account, ignores others, and then makes logical leaps that don't follow in what appears to be an attempt at defending a preference that doesn't actually need defending.

except I am not defending my preference I am explaining why YOUR preference is not the only way to read the rules.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

post 189

Page 179:
"Persuasion. When you attempt to influence someone or a group of people with tact, social graces, or good nature, the DM might ask you to make a Charisma (Persuasion) check. Typically, you use persuasion when acting in good faith, to foster friendships, make cordial requests, or exhibit proper etiquette. Examples of persuading others include convincing a chamberlain to let your party see the king, negotiating peace between warring tribes, or inspiring a crowd of townsfolk."

It seems to completely be consistent with a PC trying to persuade another PC and the DM then might call for a check.

1. That's not even your post but let's go with it
2. That quote is from the PHB for how a PC might attempt to influence someone else

So, tell us b/c I'm not connecting the dots here: how does that rule explicitly apply to an NPC who is trying to influence someone else? Is the DM maybe asking themselves to make a Charisma (Persuasion) check for the NPC? You mention DCs in another post...

so the book helps you set the DC, this is one of the rules I do not like and as such DO HOUSE RULE, so I am no help at RAW setting DCs.

Can you show us where this DC setting rule is?

 

[HammerMan]

from post 216

here are my examples of play. now remember I have never had a player leave mad about me taking away agency, I have been playing 5e for 3/4 of it's life, and I am seen by many as a good DM and an okay player to have


okay lets take 2 examples

1) me as a player. I tell the DM my Elf walks into the bar. She describes the bar, including a whole adventureing party. I go to buy a room and one thing leads to another and the dwarf NPC from that adventureing party picks a fight (verbal) with my elf. after RPing back and forth the Dwarf tried to intimdate my elf. I am not my elf, the dm is not the dwarf, we are playing those roles though. becuse this GAME has a stat call cha and a skill called inimadate the DM rolls and tells me she got a 4 (roll of 2+2 prof no cha mod). I now make an informed choice knowing that this was not very intimadating. (in some alternate world maybe she rolled a 19+2 for a 21, and I would know they were VERY intimadating) at no point did I loose or forgo agenecy here. I am still controling my elf. I still get to decide how he reacts.

2) me as a DM. two players want to buy a dog from a breeder. I as the DM know I have stats for a cool smart dog better then the MM/PHB that I have been sitting on for months. player 1 and NPC talk, I have him brag about how his dogs have both blink dog and dire wolf in them... player offers 2gp and I have NPC laugh and say "For a rare powerhouse like this, no that will be 10gp." Now the PCs decide they think they can push around the breeder. One aids the other and they say they are "intimadating the breeder into taking the 2gp" I as the DM tell the one with the higher skill to roll with advantage, and they get some huge number (it doesn't matter lets say a 27) now I have no rules in any book or even in my notes on how the breeder reacts. I have to decide quickly. SO I have him fall backwards afried, and the dogs all move up and growl... no rule no roll took away my againcy, and it is the same for the PCs