D&D General "I make a perception check."

[GMforPowergamers]

What's frustrating about your example is that you now seem to be agreeing with me - characters in the setting should be more genre savvy and act according to their knowledge.

no not genre savvy.... in world logic. They know the history of there world. The history of MCU is not the history of the marvel comics, even though they have a lot in common. I ask that everyone, player, dm for every PC and NPC try to put themselves in the world those characters live... if a new X men movie came out tomorrow and it wasn't in the MCU, and no one ever died IN UNIVERSE and came back I would feel quite pulled out of the story... unless they establish why such a character is breaking the 4th wall (like deadpool gwen pool and she hulk do)

Stories shouldn't rely on characters being blind and stupid.

noboday that I have seen has even suggested this but you... I have never told anyone to "play a stupid" I did have some players that FELT they themselves were too stupid to play some class/concepts... but we fixed that issue 20ish years ago and don't have that issue anymore.

The example you raise here is an exactly the sort of thing I called out as bad writing which you earlier disagreed with me on.

No, I said when it is bad writing it is bad... You just can handle little to no nuisance in this.

If you ask your players to use in character logic and mentality you MUST force them to do things you want
If you don't ask for how they are performing a search or the argument they use to persuade you MUST be taking control of the character
if you DO ask to clairfy when something sounds off you MUST be railroading and taking agency...

the nuance is I can ask that we all (players and dms) try our best to use in game thoughts and not force anyone to do anything
I can skip the details of a search or even a diplomacy/persuasion attempt and not write anything for that character
I can ask someone to explain to me there intent or ask them for more information with out taking away there agency

not 1 of those things is binary off/on

 

[Reynard]

I think the social interaction rules are mostly concerned with whether an NPC, given their disposition toward the end of the interaction, is willing to take a risk or incur a cost for the PCs. Anything outside of that doesn't really need much in the way of mechanics in my view.

It's also the area of the game that relies most on GM judgement since the mechanics are both sparse and weak.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think the social interaction rules are mostly concerned with whether an NPC, given their disposition toward the end of the interaction, is willing to take a risk or incur a cost for the PCs. Anything outside of that doesn't really need much in the way of mechanics in my view.

I mean I can't believe this but I agree with you

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It's when the dreaded "metagame thinking" came into the discussion.

I'm not sure what kind of thought crim metagame thinking is... but I like to when ever possible keep metagaming actions out of play (as a player and a DM).

If a player that was going to buy a drink at the bar saw a DM open the raven loft book to the vampire stats and then said out loud to the table "Oh the DM is prepping ravenloft vampires, so instead I want to go make steaks" I would expect all the rest of the table (DM or Player) would point out "Come on we didn't see that in game don't bring it into game"

now is there a thersitical work around were the player WANTS to cheat the system, sees the DM open the book to vampires, and says "I go to make steaks from the trees" and when another character asks why says "Oh my character is super paranoid... my parents died to a vampire...I see them everywhere" and gets away with it. Sure... but over time and alot of VERY odd changes to declarations we would most likely talk to that player before a game session started about the pattern and how we feel about it...

 

[robus]

I get what you mean with like logic puzzles, for example. Personally, as a player I always find “roll to see if you solve the puzzle” moments intensely dissatisfying. I would rather just not include such puzzles at all than abstract them to that degree.

Yeah,

My group said they loved puzzles and so I added some logic puzzles to a wizard's lair and it was the least fun they had the entire time we played. Something about it being "on the clock" made the puzzles more stress than fun. I stuck with exploration puzzles (like finding hidden switches, doors etc) rather than pure logic puzzles.

Really didn't expect that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think the social interaction rules are mostly concerned with whether an NPC, given their disposition toward the end of the interaction, is willing to take a risk or incur a cost for the PCs. Anything outside of that doesn't really need much in the way of mechanics in my view.

Yeah that's primarily how I use them.

I notice a lot of DMs don't use them that way though. One DM I play with feels the need to make you roll Persuasion just about every other sentence in certain situations, which is just guaranteeing failure - and sure enough as soon as you do roll low the conversation is over. He's not doing it on purpose to be difficult, he just hasn't thought it through.

I think there could be more to them if D&D was more a game about social hierarchies and tight-knit courts and so on, like say Vampire is, but it ain't, by and large, so it doesn't need to do that stuff.

 

[iserith]

It's also the area of the game that relies most on GM judgement since the mechanics are both sparse and weak.

I think the social interaction rules are actually pretty good by D&D standards, but they really appear to be intended for more consequential interactions with NPCs who have established characteristics, not the odd flirtation with the barmaid. There's really no need to roll there.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It's also the area of the game that relies most on GM judgement since the mechanics are both sparse and weak.

Yup. And threading the needle between "mind-control" and "skills that do nothing" is not always easy, especially when players often very much want them to be mind control, and certain DMs seem at least subconsciously affronted that these skills exist and could mess with their NPCs so want them to do nothing.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yeah,

My group said they loved puzzles and so I added some logic puzzles to a wizard's lair and it was the least fun they had the entire time we played. Something about it being "on the clock" made the puzzles more stress than fun. I stuck with exploration puzzles (like finding hidden switches, doors etc) rather than pure logic puzzles.

Really didn't expect that.

I find that too many riddles and puzzles have a 'you either know or you wont get the answer' property. Some are 'if you know HOW to do it you can do teh work and figure it out. This has lead to more then a few games coming to a screaming halt because the players can't get it (I sat out an entire multi hour night because a single 'puzzle' that the DM thought would take 5-10 minutes took the entire night...)

 

[Chaosmancer]

What the heck was the point? Why did I bother listening to what the DM said or crafting an argument I thought would be convincing, when I would have gotten exactly the same result just by saying “I try to persuade her to help us” and pressing the Persuasion button on my Roll20 character sheet?

Enjoying the story? Getting a better sense of the larger world? Because you are playing a game where listening to the DM is a major part of the game.

Why would I bother crafting a believable world filled with believable characters with complex motivations if the thing you care about is whether or not you get advantage? Maybe the DM thought your speech completely missed the mark and they would have auto-failed you, but figured you put enough effort in to warrant a check.