Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7999319" data-attributes="member: 6779196">From that example I can glean that the player’s goal is to convince the guard to let them past and their approach is to talk to the guard. Personally, I don’t think that approach passes the bar of reasonable specificity. The player might instead speak in character, saying to me what their character says to the guard (or a rough approximation thereof - I subscribe to the “clouded mirror” view of the relationship between at-table talk and in-fiction talk), which would easily clear that bar. Alternatively, they might explain in out of character terms what kind of thing their character says to the guard. For example “I threaten to beat the guard’s face in if he doesn’t let me pass,” or “I try to fast-talk the guard to trick him into letting me pass,” “I speak seductively to the guard, implying I might do him a ‘special favor’ if he lets me past,” or “I try to impress upon the guard how important our mission is so he’ll let us past,” or “I slip the guard 5 gold and ask him to let me pass.”In any of these cases, the approach is reasonably specific that I should have no trouble determining if it can succeed and fail, and what the consequences of success or failure might be, and which ability would be most appropriate to call for a check with if necessary. as well as for the player to determine which of their proficiencies (if any) might be applicable if I do call for a check. A player who has invested in upping their Intimidation bonus, for example by playing a half-orc, using one of their class or background proficiencies on Intimidation, or even perhaps choosing it as one of their expertise skills, then it would be smart play to describe an approach more like the “threatening to beat his face in” one. That would give the player the best chance of succeeding without needing to make a check, as well as allowing them to apply that proficiency bonus for intimidation if a roll is required.</blockquote>

Verification