Search results

Exactly!

Yes, at this point, your opinion is well documented. I’m just pointing to games that still have potentially deep roleplaying despite lacking such stats or, if they’re present, not relying on them to define the character. I mention this because you’ve implied… or seemed to imply… that not...

Actually, it can mean exactly that! I’ve played several games over the last few years that don’t actually have character attributes of these kinds. They work perfectly fine and everyone’s still able to roleplay their characters just fine, without needed to lean on a low stat to define them...

My cousin Mike!

I think the idea that human intelligence can be fully and accurately represented by a single number is very silly, and so any demand or expectation that any character with such a score behave in a specific way is equally silly.

Also, there’s the chance that the low-Charisma character could conceivably succeed on every Charisma-based check they ever have to make. How would the people of the game world describe such a person? They’s describe them as Persuasive or maybe Intimidating or Deceptive. Perhaps as…...

I think it’s meant to be like “force of personality” or something… but yeah, breaking down the spectrum of human ability into six categories requires a good deal of simplification. Well, not only is the brilliance of my post lost on you… but you now have a new saddest post.

Okay, so let’s take an example. It’s silly, but I hope it’ll be something that everyone gets. Rodney Dangerfield’s character in Caddyshack… is he a low Charisma character who somehow makes all his checks? Or is he a high Charisma character whose player has decided to play him as crude and...

But what does “ignoring it other than on die rolls” even mean? How do you quantify it in a way that’s satisfactory? How different is an 8 from a 10? One would hope there are better opportunities for roleplaying besides pretending to drop a torch and then remarking on how big a klutz you are!

Who said I refuse to let it influence behavior? I mean, penalties on rolls certainly influence behavior. And that’s before we even consider how the player chooses to portray it. All I said is I don’t think having other people dictating how the player needs to portray the character.

Sure, I would agree there may be better ways to mechanize this stuff for gameplay. I just think that leaving it open to interpretation by the GM is one of the worst ways to go.

It depends on how it’s implemented. I mean, taking D&D as an easy example, I’ve seen people who consider an Intelligence of 8 as being an utter imbecile instead of being a little below average. As if the character is just walking around like “Duuurh what’s dat ting dere?” A little below...

I’d not heard that. I can see some similarities, for sure… especially in our game where we’ve made the PCs kind of wandering arbiters. I enjoyed Mouseguard when I played it.

While I have no problem with character stats or traits being involved in how things play out, I’d much prefer it be in a direct way… like a penalty to a roll… rather than some indirect interpretation… such as a GM saying “your character isn’t X enough to do that”.

Thanks! If you have any suggestions or observations, don’t hold back! The more we play, the more I realize we were doing a bit wrong early on. I’m trying to acknowledge that when it comes up… but if you see something that seems off, it could be that we were or are doing something wrong!

Before I would resort to railroading, I’d just prompt them to make a decision. I’d summarize the options they’re considering and then say “so how do you want to proceed?” I think part of the GM’s job is to help maintain some sense of forward momentum to the game. There’s certainly nothing...

I made the distinction between “a railroad” as a noun and “railroading” as a verb up thread. I think it’s an important one. Linearity in adventure design is often labeled as a railroad… but that doesn’t really say anything about the experience of play. Is that linearity an engaging experience...

Okay... so we're a few sessions in now, and the game has been very enjoyable. We've muddled through the rules a bit at times out of the interest of keeping things moving, but for the most part, I think we're largely doing what we're supposed to. Play has been engaging and surprising, which is...

That’s how some campaigns work. Not all. The idea that this was a “side jaunt” with the intention of bolstering them by level or by alliances made certainly implies a structure being in place. That this will happen, and then that will happen. And this isn’t a bad thing by any means. But that...

So I’ve read most of the thread, including the follow up clarifications. It’s certainly possible I missed some details by commenting so far after the OP… but I wanted to comment. Whether or not what you did was in some way objectively railroading isn’t something we’ll get consensus about, as...