Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6685036" data-attributes="member: 6681948">I’m not sure we are as far apart as you may perceive us to be.I wonder what the players would think if, each time they rolled a successful Bluff check, the NPC’s were played on the basis that they think the PC is perfectly sincere in his insanity.&nbsp; “A successful Bluff check indicates that the target reacts as you wish, at least for a short time (usually 1 round or less) or believes something that you want it to believe.”&nbsp; It does not, therefore, indicate that the target believes you are hopelessly insane, and does not fall for your ruse.Here, I think you and I are on the same page.&nbsp; Where I have seen some games depart (and some gamers strongly argue in favour of) is that the latter player is rewarded for his pretty and powerful words – he gets a bonus, or just automatically succeeds, with his social interaction objectives because he “role played so well”*, where our stutterer will be penalized for his own lack of oratorical skill rather than being rewarded for his character’s investment in those skills.* No, he did not.&nbsp; He role played horribly.&nbsp; He role played his 8 CHA socially inept character as a skillful orator.That's not to say bonuses could not be obtained.&nbsp; Either character should get a bonus if they, for example, know that the Duke of Chester is a lover of fine food and drink, and so bring him a gift of a rare vintage.&nbsp; Similarly, if they know he thinks poorly of the Baron of Undermere, and suggest he is collaborating with the Ogre tribe they are trying to get him to assist in attacking, that is&nbsp; much like our poor, or skilled, warrior flanking an opponent, and should be similarly rewarded with a bonus.&nbsp; But attempting to superimpose the suave player's oratorical skills on his socially inept 8 CHA character?&nbsp; That merits a penalty for poor role playing, if anything.Perform (Comedy).&nbsp; The problem is that the fiction can only go so far as to say that he has told a few jokes and the group laughs uproariously.&nbsp; We can’t make it funny to the players.&nbsp; As a result, it comes off poorly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6685036, member: 6681948"] I’m not sure we are as far apart as you may perceive us to be. I wonder what the players would think if, each time they rolled a successful Bluff check, the NPC’s were played on the basis that they think the PC is perfectly sincere in his insanity. “A successful Bluff check indicates that the target reacts as you wish, at least for a short time (usually 1 round or less) or believes something that you want it to believe.” It does not, therefore, indicate that the target believes you are hopelessly insane, and does not fall for your ruse. Here, I think you and I are on the same page. Where I have seen some games depart (and some gamers strongly argue in favour of) is that the latter player is rewarded for his pretty and powerful words – he gets a bonus, or just automatically succeeds, with his social interaction objectives because he “role played so well”*, where our stutterer will be penalized for his own lack of oratorical skill rather than being rewarded for his character’s investment in those skills. * No, he did not. He role played horribly. He role played his 8 CHA socially inept character as a skillful orator. That's not to say bonuses could not be obtained. Either character should get a bonus if they, for example, know that the Duke of Chester is a lover of fine food and drink, and so bring him a gift of a rare vintage. Similarly, if they know he thinks poorly of the Baron of Undermere, and suggest he is collaborating with the Ogre tribe they are trying to get him to assist in attacking, that is much like our poor, or skilled, warrior flanking an opponent, and should be similarly rewarded with a bonus. But attempting to superimpose the suave player's oratorical skills on his socially inept 8 CHA character? That merits a penalty for poor role playing, if anything. Perform (Comedy). The problem is that the fiction can only go so far as to say that he has told a few jokes and the group laughs uproariously. We can’t make it funny to the players. As a result, it comes off poorly. [/QUOTE]

Verification