D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Lanefan]

For me this falls into the category of "Who gives a dusty flumph?" It's none of my business as a DM or a player. People are free to make their own choices as to what their characters do. If they play to their personality traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws, great, that might be worth Inspiration. If they don't, that's fine too. And anyway, even if someone does act "out-of-character," why is that bad? Are characters not capable of complexity, contradiction, or change?

They are. It's when such changes are only ever done when there's (either or both of) an in-game or meta advantage to doing so that I have a problem.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Not so much "so and so is cheating", more like longer more-detailed versions of "I don't think so and so is playing in good faith". And chances are very high that if someone's passing me a note like that I've also already noticed the issue as well; the note just serves as confirmation that I'm not alone in my observations.

That said, I have once or twice in the (distant) past received notes that outright said "so and so is cheating", usually in an attempt to alert me to some - well, let's call it "creative" dice rolling.

I don't even know how to respond to that.

I guess our gaming experiences are so (sooooo) different that it might explain why we have such different preferences and perspectives.

 

[iserith]

They are. It's when such changes are only ever done when there's (either or both of) an in-game or meta advantage to doing so that I have a problem.

Well at least you have informers who will point out infractions you might have missed. So that's something.

 

[Bill Zebub]

To me those are different things, in that playing a string of melee characters or a string of dark-shady-past characters doesn't really provide those characters any in-game advantage over anyone else. Playing a string of characters who won't be swayed by non-combat interactions does, over those players who will allow their PCs to be swayed by such things.

It comes down to either a) give those social abilities and skills some game-mechanical teeth (against PCs and NPCs alike) such that players can't blithely choose to ignore them, or b) get rid of them entirely and truly let people play as they will.

My preference is for b) above.

"in-game advantages"?

Isn't refusing to be intimidated by somebody who should intimidate you be a huge liability? I could see that character type causing all kinds of problems for the party.

Unless, of course, the NPC isn't actually, really, justifiably intimidating, but just rolled well at their "Intimidate check".

But do you see my point?

 

[Lanefan]

Nope. But I get to decide if/when he's intimidated, not some roll. If he's highly emotional and a bit of a coward, I will portray him that way.

You will, yes. I'd like to think I would also.

Thing is, there's boatloads of players out there who won't follow through on that portrayal when it matters, is my point, unless forced to by game mechanics.

With 5e it's betwixt and between - there's mechanics, kind of, but they have no teeth.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Thing is, there's boatloads of players out there who won't follow through on that portrayal when it matters, is my point, unless forced to by game mechanics.

Heavens help us. What will those people do next? Keep their peanut butter in the fridge?

 

[Mordhau]

You will, yes. I'd like to think I would also.

Thing is, there's boatloads of players out there who won't follow through on that portrayal when it matters, is my point, unless forced to by game mechanics.

With 5e it's betwixt and between - there's mechanics, kind of, but they have no teeth.

How do game mechanics force them to follow through on role-playing?

 

[Lanefan]

Gotta say, this sounds like an unpleasant environment to game in.

Meh - it's not as bad as I probably make it sound; but we have had bad-faith players in our games now and then, along with the occasional outright cheater. And given as we're all friends outside the game, trying to do anything about it can get a bit awkward.

 

[iserith]

Heavens help us. What will those people do next? Keep their peanut butter in the fridge?

C'mon, dude, they're not MONSTERS.

 

[Bill Zebub]

How do game mechanics force them to follow through on role-playing?

And if they don't want to follow somebody else's notion of roleplaying and need more "sticks" (@Lanefan's term) to enforce roleplaying discipline, is that really going to end well?