D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Mort]

I mean, if a bunch of players want high-action low-thespianism play, maybe that’s what the game should evolve into?

“Can we stop talking and get to the point” is a pretty common play style preference!

My Friday night group is like this. I swear I've seen some of the players start shaking from withdrawal if it goes too long between combats.

And I totally get it, they're coming down from high stress, mostly very talk heavy jobs and sometimes they just want to hit something.

 

[soviet]

Consuming lead is really just a play style preference and I support you on your RPG journey.

Consuming plastic breaks my verisimilitude as they wouldn't have had access to it back then.

 

[Oofta]

In the imagined rule, the impassioned speech comes from the player.

Which is not inconsistent with D&D's model: as I already noted upthread, which square a PC moves to during combat is determined by the player's choices, not by the INT or DEX score on the PC sheet; which spells a PC memorises is determined by the player's choices, not by the INT or WIS score on the PC sheet; etc.

If you honestly can't understand the difference between a simulationist approach and the approach you're proposing I don't know what to say. The speech, or at least the contents therein, come from the player. The delivery comes from the character's inherent abilities and training as represented by ability scores and proficiency. It does not come from some external game token.

While D&D is a very crude, oversimplified simulation of a fantasy novel world it is still a simulation to me.

 

[TwoSix]

It has no relation to the character’s capabilities. An impassioned speech? How well they can get their point across is dependent (in D&D's simplified model) on charisma. The content of the speech is up to the player.

If the mechanics give you a token because you have a high Charisma, as an example, that it most certainly would be related to the character’s abilities.

It might not be your preference for mechanics, but your preferred “playstyle” is quite possible to achieve with dice less mechanics.

 

[Oofta]

If the mechanics give you a token because you have a high Charisma, as an example, that it most certainly would be related to the character’s abilities.

It might not be your preference for mechanics, but your preferred “playstyle” is quite possible to achieve with dice less mechanics.

You don't need a token because you have a high charisma. You already have a better chance to persuade or deceive because you have a high charisma. I don't really care what other games do, other games have completely different approaches. This is a discussion of playstyle vs mechanics in a D&D forum.

 

[soviet]

You don't need a token because you have a high charisma. You already have a better chance to persuade or deceive because you have a high charisma. I don't really care what other games do, other games have completely different approaches. This is a discussion of playstyle vs mechanics in a D&D forum.

I'm not sure what is really meant by a game token here. If you mean something beyond the charisma/persuade modifier then 5e already has a bunch of those - bardic inspiration, Lucky feat, background traits, inspiration, various spells, etc.

 

[soviet]

It has no relation to the character’s capabilities. An impassioned speech? How well they can get their point across is dependent (in D&D's simplified model) on charisma. The content of the speech is up to the player.

Oofta, do I understand you to be saying that when you adjudicate a persuasion check, the delivery of the player doesn't affect the chances of success? It's still a skill check using the character's modifiers. If the player's delivery is particularly impassioned or effective does that grant a bonus or affect the DC?

 

[TwoSix]

You don't need a token because you have a high charisma. You already have a better chance to persuade or deceive because you have a high charisma. I don't really care what other games do, other games have completely different approaches. This is a discussion of playstyle vs mechanics in a D&D forum.

Ignore the tokens. There's an interesting question here that's extremely relevant to D&D.

If you're prioritizing immersive "acting as your character" roleplay, where the rules "get out of the way", where is the point where you need to start calling for a resolution check? And how much, if any, impact does the immersive roleplay have on the results of the check?

If the player (immersed as his character) and the DM (playing the duke) have a ten-minute negotiation in character at the table, and the player does an excellent job, does that bypass the need for checks? Does it give a bonus? Or is a straight roll?

Are you more likely to bypass the check if the character has 16 Cha and Persuasion expertise? What if they only have 12 Cha and Persuasion proficiency?

 

[Oofta]

Oofta, do I understand you to be saying that when you adjudicate a persuasion check, the delivery of the player doesn't affect the chances of success? It's still a skill check using the character's modifiers. If the player's delivery is particularly impassioned or effective does that grant a bonus or affect the DC?

No. What they say and other factors may play in, but a charismatic delivery by the player does not.

 

[soviet]

No. What they say and other factors may play in, but a charismatic delivery by the player does not.

So aren't you completely disincentivising players from providing that charismatic delivery?