Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4091609" data-attributes="member: 2067">I see, I see...See, for me, that doesn't gel with the role I'm playing.If my character has 20 ranks in Streetwise (or whatever), he's going to know things that I, as a player, do not. He's going to know which alleyways lead out of the city, and if he's jumping down allyways trying to get out of the city, he'll only rarely make a dumb descision like that. I, as a player, might make that descision a lot, so if I make a dumb descision that my character wouldn't make, I'd hope my DM would call it out. I think that's more similar to what these 4e skill checks are doing. The player doesn't point to an ally to run down, the player declares &quot;I'm running out of the city!&quot; The DM asks &quot;How?&quot; The player says &quot;I use Streetwise to try to find an alley that leads out of the city.&quot; If the check succeeds, he does, if it doesn't, maybe he finds himself down a dead-end. Thus, the player doesn't make that descision, the character does. Y'know, if the great archmage targeted a fire elemental with a fireball, I, as the DM, would pause the action and say: &quot;Now, as a great archmage, you do know that fire isn't the most effective against a fire creature. Do you still want to do this?&quot;Maybe I'm too forgiving of a DM, I generally advise players if they're behaving out of character, which includes making dumb choices their characters probably wouldn't make. I'm a fan of the skill system because it makes it easier for players to stay in-character, announcing their goals and how their character gets there without having to nominate specific courses of action that their characters may know would be dumb.I can see how it wouldn't gel with the way you do skills, though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4091609, member: 2067"] I see, I see... See, for me, that doesn't gel with the role I'm playing. If my character has 20 ranks in Streetwise (or whatever), he's going to know things that I, as a player, do not. He's going to know which alleyways lead out of the city, and if he's jumping down allyways trying to get out of the city, he'll only rarely make a dumb descision like that. I, as a player, might make that descision a lot, so if I make a dumb descision that my character wouldn't make, I'd hope my DM would call it out. I think that's more similar to what these 4e skill checks are doing. The player doesn't point to an ally to run down, the player declares "I'm running out of the city!" The DM asks "How?" The player says "I use Streetwise to try to find an alley that leads out of the city." If the check succeeds, he does, if it doesn't, maybe he finds himself down a dead-end. Thus, the player doesn't make that descision, the character does. Y'know, if the great archmage targeted a fire elemental with a fireball, I, as the DM, would pause the action and say: "Now, as a great archmage, you do know that fire isn't the most effective against a fire creature. Do you still want to do this?" Maybe I'm too forgiving of a DM, I generally advise players if they're behaving out of character, which includes making dumb choices their characters probably wouldn't make. I'm a fan of the skill system because it makes it easier for players to stay in-character, announcing their goals and how their character gets there without having to nominate specific courses of action that their characters may know would be dumb. I can see how it wouldn't gel with the way you do skills, though. [/QUOTE]

Verification