D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[HammerMan]

Gosh I wouldn't take it on myself to try to tell the difference when it's somebody else doing it. I certainly wouldn't try to enforce a rule that policed that.

If I don't like how other people like to roleplay, I find new people to play with. I don't try to use rules to force them to roleplay my way.

yeah that too.

If after you talk to someone that is doing things your group doesn't like, then that group is not a good fit for the player.

 

[HammerMan]

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

yes.... I mean communication is key

 

[HammerMan]

How is "he seems to be lying" different from "his fidgeting and stammering indicate a lack of truthfulness"? That would "put a thumb on the scale" as to how the player is expected to react and set it up so any further NPC who fidgets would be seen as a potential liar.

it is different because Iserath believes that player skill is more important then character skill. You the player has to be able to read the DM, be on the same page as the DM, and then determine what it means... Of course he hasn't taken this so far as to say you have to be battle trained to swing a sword or memorize spells...but it is the same idea.

I tried a LARP once at Gencon and if you wanted to play a wizard they gave you this laminated sheet of paper, it had things on it for you to memorize. when you went to cast a spell you had to answer a question based on remembering all the patterns.... I asked "Can I just memorize one spell and not have to remember a whole paper?" and I was told no, it was all or nothing because even 1 spell would be complex.

 

[HammerMan]

Do you similarly bring down the hammer if somebody plays a mysterious character with a dark past more than once or twice?

not if they are intersperced. BUt we as a group would say something if your 3rd character sounded alot like your second character and your first....

What if somebody plays only melee characters? Is that also bad roleplaying?

melee is too broad. You can make (in 5e alone) like a dozen melee characters that are nothing alike (it also is ONLY combat so not going to worry if they are similar that way).

If your first character is a Paliden/warlock with defenseive fighting and great weapon mastery who is an orphan with no connections to anyone and is chaotic neutral, and your second character is a Warlock/Paliden with defensive fighting and great weapon mastery who is an orphan with no connections to anyone and is chaotic neutral, we would tell you if you make any variant of that again for our 3rd campaign we will just say "no" to that character... and the discusion would start most likely after game 1 or 2 of2nd capaign...if not at session 0.

 

[HammerMan]

IMO, that's actually bad. It limits your options for describing characters when you say things like "they're fidgeting, which is indicative of lying." Not only is that not true in real life (meaning many people wouldn't think to connect it without you telling them that), but it means that we can't trust you, the DM, to have a character who fidgets who isn't a liar. Furthermore, it makes all your characters stereotypes. "Whoops, he just fidgeted, guess he's a liar." Or worse: "Looks like this guy's a liar; why not just kill him now and get it over with?" It honestly doesn't matter if you say that fidgeting "may" indicate the person is a liar. You're either saying the character is a liar, or you're setting us up to not believe this person when they're telling the truth.

pixel hunting...

Secondly, if you say "fidgeting is indicative of lying," well, that's kind of offensive to any player who fidgets. If you had said "you noticed that he fidgets when he lies," that's different, because that's an individual tell. So you should probably watch how you describe these things.

and again (agreeing with you) this is a crazy mini game the DM made up to test player skill not character skill... and is not RAW.

Thirdly, it's really pretty mean to test player skill in remembering a given tell. I have ADHD and a terrible memory. Unless you blow fidgeting up to ridiculous levels, I might not remember even that detail half an hour later. Why punish my character because I have problems?

because the poster believes that he has read the 1 true way to play and they will not deviate form that original idea no matter the evidence presented.

And as I showed, no, you're not.

And as I showed, no, you're not.

and this and the next one is why I am responding... I realize I can not see who you are responding to but they are still putting forward the toxic "i am right, I know the truth and you don't" mindset.

And yes, I do want players to stay in character. Is there a reason why their character is never intimidated by anyone? Is it in your background? Or is it just something you pull out whenever you feel like no matter how appropriate to the setting, your character, or the NPC in question?

I don't understand how people in this thread are constantly okay with useing out of game info personality and skill over in game, and then accuse the people who want the in game skill info and personality to trump that of "not understanding the RAW"

 

[HammerMan]

People seem to have this weirdly overblown aversion to anything that could vaguely be connected with “player skill”

just like people on your side seem to have an issue with people trying to play a character with skills and traits they do not have the ability to replicate out of game being surpassed by characters without said skills or traits because the player of that character can replicate them.

 

[HammerMan]

For example, I might try something like “As we’re talking with him, I pay close attention to when he fidgets to try and see if there’s any noticeable pattern behind it.” I imagine @iserith might then either tell me I notice a pattern and what it is, tell me I don’t notice any such pattern, or ask me to make a check of some sort.

and yet he would require you the player to pick up on the social que to ask, even if your character had a 20 wis prof and expertise i insight and a magic item adding 5 to insight... because as good as the character is, the limit is always the player ability.

 

[HammerMan]

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

I agree, if you (not you you the genral you) feels someone is not playing in character or good faith then they should bring it up out loud so the group can talk about it, trouble shoot it and fix it.

 

[HammerMan]

Kind of...perhaps.

And this brings it right back to what I said about 75 pages ago: if PCs can choose to ignore these things there's no justifiable reason why NPCs can't make that same choice, which makes the very existence of those skills pointless. Get rid of them.

yup.
I find that the 'consequences' of social skills seem to be more RP in my games... but it seems some allow it to be mind control on NPCs and not affect PCs at all... and that seems weird.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Gotcha. I don't have time right now, but I'll pen an answer and post it later. I'm framing it - were PHB 185 a game rule, what will that entail? Right?

And I have made this very point. I have repeatedly said that we can very well consider the whole text holistically - all the rules and guidelines together - and then we will be unable to choose which is the better justified of DM-decides and PC-certainty, other than our underlying preferences.

Let me rephrase:

When it comes to whether or not a DM should call for an NPC to make an ability check that has a possible outcome of affecting how a PC thinks, acts, or talks, you feel the rules support both prior-certainty and DM decides? The former depending upon, and the latter ignoring, the p185 guidance on roleplaying. Is that accurate?