D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Mordhau]

If you have an in-character reason for your character to not be intimidated by the warlord, that's fine. It might be stupid of your character, but if it's in-character, whatever. But the problem is with people who aren't intimidated for out-of-character reasons.

What about if you're character is Snake Plisken, or one of a thousand Hollywood action heroes who make jokes in the face of overwhelming odds?

I mean I think these are bad characters, and they don't really work very well for a role-playing game, but they're not without precedent in popular culture.

These sorts of characters might reveal a fundamental disconnect in the sort of game everyone at the table wants to be playing, but it's still playing the character of a kind.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Not the rules, no. That's only if we say that all text has equal weight. There then are so many inter and intratextual contradictions that conflicting readings are equally well sustained.

If we focus only on rules, then only DM decides stands, because DMG 244 tells us PHB 185 is a guideline.

Answer the question - I even said “guidance if that pleases you”


EDIT: I’m realizing this is probably not coming across as I intended which was “Answer the Question” in a manner like “A Few Good Men” and then you say “You can’t handle the truth!” And then some other things happen. But I just watched the clip and not only did i botch the line but boy does everyone look so young.

 

[Faolyn]

What about if you're character is Snake Plisken, or one of a thousand Hollywood action heroes who make jokes in the face of overwhelming odds?

I'm guessing most of those characters have in-character reasons for acting as they do, and it's not the actor refusing to get into the role, yes?

 

[iserith]

See, I disagree that this is telling the player what their character thinks. Instead, when I roll for Deception, I am rolling for what the PC experiences. "He seems honest."

I think what you're put off by is that people tend to use sentences like "you think he's lying" in a way that (edit: you think) means the player can't choose otherwise. But that sort of phrasing isn't mind-control. It's just a shortcut, like saying "you don't find any traps on the chest." That doesn't mean there aren't any traps, and it doesn't mean the PC has to open the chest. And you don't have to trust an NPC just because the DM says "she seems honest." People use that "you think he's lying" or "she seems honest" because--as I pointed out--only giving the physical descriptions of the NPC like "he's fidgety and contradictory" doesn't always say what you intend it to say. Is a person's fidgetiness due to lying, nervousness for other reasons, a personality trait, or hemorrhoids? Are they contradicting themselves because they're lying, because they're a crappy storyteller, because the events were convoluted and possibly magical in nature, or because the DM made a mistake? Use a description with the phrase "you think he's lying" if you actually want to get across a message clearly.

(This is also why I don't like the advice "always trust the DM." No, the DM should be honest in what you experience, not in what things actually are like. Your PC's senses can fool them.)

Perhaps you can see that how the DM says a thing actually puts the DM's thumb on the scale as to how the player is expected to react. I know that some are saying "Oh, but they can do what they want" on the one hand, then saying they do have an expectation that if they're not acting in the expected way, they aren't really roleplaying. At least one in this thread penalizes their XP. So I hope you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for it here.

As well, I think you may be confusing my description of the environment with the narration of the adventurer's action. If I were to say that someone is fidgety, that's going to be on the front end. It's a clue in the description of the environment that this person you're interacting with may have something going on with them. Just like the scorch mark on the wall opposite the door may suggest that there may be some danger in interacting with the door. Maybe the player picks up on this and takes action to find out more before making assumptions about what's going on and maybe they don't. After resolving, say, a Wisdom (Insight) check, then I'm narrating the success or failure of the player's action declaration e.g. "The NPC's fidgeting and stammering indicates a lack of truthfulness..." Then I loop back around to describing the environment, perhaps having the NPC continue to fidget and spin lies. What does the character do about that? Play on to find out.

 

[Mordhau]

I'm guessing most of those characters have in-character reasons for acting as they do, and it's not the actor refusing to get into the role, yes?

The point though is it's trivially easy to have an in-character reason to act this way.

If I don't want to have my character be intimidated, then I play him as a guy who can't be intimidated. He's too badass to be intimidated by anything. That's now his character, so I'm playing him in character.

I guess I don't understand you're point. What is an example of this out of character behaviour and why is it out of character? How do we know what's in character for the PC to behave in an intimidating situation until they're thrown into such a situation and we see how they act?

 

[Maxperson]

To be fair, the DMG suggests (another guideline, I believe, but if its a rule we could have some fun with it) the Roll With It approach.

I'm more middle path, for D&D, that said.

I posted quotes that most to all of the DMG consists of guidelines.

 

[Maxperson]

In what way is it circular?

It wasn't. I've noticed a tendency with @clearstream to state arguments are circular when they aren't. We're shown rules and reasoning for our arguments.

 

[Charlaquin]

It wasn't. I've noticed a tendency with @clearstream to state arguments are circular when they aren't. We're shown rules and reasoning for our arguments.

I mean, I agree, but I was hoping he would walk me through why he believes it’s circular.

 

[Faolyn]

I guess I don't understand you're point. What is an example of this out of character behaviour and why is it out of character? How do we know what's in character for the PC to behave in an intimidating situation until they're thrown into such a situation and we see how they act?

I usually find it pretty easy to tell when a player is acting OOC--I ask them.

 

[Mordhau]

I usually find it pretty easy to tell when a player is acting OOC--I ask them.

And I'm no further enlightened about what you're trying to say.