Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Are things like Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy too easy?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5605007" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>I'm going to go point by point for ease of conversation. Don't take this as aggressive argumentation on my part, please, as that's not the intent.</p><p></p><p>I won't play in a group that uses minis (I don't condemn them, but it kills the immersion too much for me, personally, while I understand it helps others in that same area). My group doesn't use minis. So, someone can say, "I'll move next to the bandit that looks badly wounded, and position myself next to another bandit as well, if possible," and that's fine. It doesn't mean that people will.</p><p></p><p>Just like it isn't assured that people will prepare spells that will be remotely useful.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>When I GM, if someone says a lie that is too outrageous for their character (based on their Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma), I'll let them know that it's a bad lie because of <em>X</em>. If there mental stats don't meet what I think is necessary to get it automatically, I'll give them a roll.</p><p></p><p>There's no real reason your Int and or Wis roll would apply to fire spells and not to lies, in my mind.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's true about spells. Preparing all fire spells before going into the Abyss is worse than not positioning yourself for a cleave.</p><p></p><p>But, missing out on a cleave is only one missed opportunity, though it can make a big difference, potentially, when missed. Just like blowing a Bluff check is missing out on one opportunity, though it too can make a big difference if blown.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Our mileage has greatly varied. My group doesn't really suffer from either regularly, though we've been known to blow either (especially when we were new players). Just like new players often need help with combat tactics, I think new players players often need help with social practices as well.</p><p></p><p>After a while, though, you can't just get advice anymore, and you can't just say "I roll, and if I get a result of X, then I made something cool up" in my group. You need to say what your lie is, have it judged on believability, have the appropriate DC set, and then roll at it. You don't necessarily have to RP it out if you had some sort of crippling social disorder, but a "I tell him <em>X</em>" would be necessary. I'd potentially allow others players to help or give advice if your mental stats were high enough (as that character is probably better than any single member of the group, I have little problem letting players team up occasionally).</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying that you should play differently. I hope that's not what you're getting from this. I'm saying that you're not playing in any invalid way, but neither are the people you're arguing against. It comes down to what works for a group. Groups usually play their preferences, and usually have reasons for doing so. You may not agree with the reasons, but they sure aren't going to have less fun because of your disagreements.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is my experience too, for new gamers (or gamers new to a particular system).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have a list of 5 things to go over your character before you start to mechanically create him. Number 5 is "making sure that the player can play the character" and it's one of the more important rules. It doesn't mean you need to play to the same level as the character. It means that you need to be able to lie if you're lying, to be Lawful if you're a monk, be forgiving if you're playing a forgiving priest.</p><p></p><p>I know that some in this thread might strongly disagree with that, but D&D is not escapism for me or my group. It is not a place to go to create the Alternate Better Me. It is a game we play, with the intention of having fun, and often times with the intent of exploring new points of view, or to see what it's like to have another outlook on life. While my 5th rule does limit this exploration, if you can't play that type of character anyway, then it won't go over well even without that rule. You won't know what a Lawful monk is actually like if you can't be play a Lawful character.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Our mileage has varied, etc. etc.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I know this is true for many people, but I'll disagree from my group's experience with it. I think we have yet to experience a traditional dungeon delve. Traps are rare things indeed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Maybe our group is just made up of very different people (I suspect it is), but this sounds so fringe to me.</p><p></p><p>If they're just lightly socially inept, then I hold that they can absolutely improve at making up lies or diplomatically dealing with NPCs. That's something they'll need advice on, need to practice, need reminders on, and maybe even need to state from a more detached viewpoint "I'll compliment him on his castle" rather than a more flowery description in-character complimenting the fountain, architecture, etc.</p><p></p><p>If, however, someone is highly socially inept, then it's a lot more fringe to me. Yeah, it'll be easier for them to learn Cleave then to be charismatic. I still hold that they can learn what types of lies might be good or bad, or that bowing in most games is universally understood as some sort of sign of respect. I don't believe, however, that if they're so socially inept that they cannot learn these basic things, that they should be playing with your average group. And that is not to ostracize them, but because if their social leaning is really that inept, that interactions with most people in general will have problems, and that people trained in the correct areas are best at changing this, not your average D&D group.</p><p></p><p>If they're somewhere in between, then I think it scales appropriately.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, but you can just as easily give them tips and advice:</p><p></p><p>"OK, you're a noble diplomat, the best skills at this level would be A, B and C if you want to continue on your current path..." or, "You can attempt to lie to the duke, but you did find out earlier that he knows who paid for the assassin, or you can try to intimidate him, since you found out about his illegitimate son that he's been trying to hide from his wife..." or, "you learned you're going to be talking to a king in your next adventure and he especially hates elves, so bringing in your elven goods and singing your songs in elven like you normally do may not be a good idea."</p><p></p><p>Again, I see no reason not to give advice to both. It's been the standard in my group from the get-go (even if we're much better at it now than we used to be).</p><p></p><p>As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5605007, member: 6668292"] I'm going to go point by point for ease of conversation. Don't take this as aggressive argumentation on my part, please, as that's not the intent. I won't play in a group that uses minis (I don't condemn them, but it kills the immersion too much for me, personally, while I understand it helps others in that same area). My group doesn't use minis. So, someone can say, "I'll move next to the bandit that looks badly wounded, and position myself next to another bandit as well, if possible," and that's fine. It doesn't mean that people will. Just like it isn't assured that people will prepare spells that will be remotely useful. When I GM, if someone says a lie that is too outrageous for their character (based on their Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma), I'll let them know that it's a bad lie because of [I]X[/I]. If there mental stats don't meet what I think is necessary to get it automatically, I'll give them a roll. There's no real reason your Int and or Wis roll would apply to fire spells and not to lies, in my mind. It's true about spells. Preparing all fire spells before going into the Abyss is worse than not positioning yourself for a cleave. But, missing out on a cleave is only one missed opportunity, though it can make a big difference, potentially, when missed. Just like blowing a Bluff check is missing out on one opportunity, though it too can make a big difference if blown. Our mileage has greatly varied. My group doesn't really suffer from either regularly, though we've been known to blow either (especially when we were new players). Just like new players often need help with combat tactics, I think new players players often need help with social practices as well. After a while, though, you can't just get advice anymore, and you can't just say "I roll, and if I get a result of X, then I made something cool up" in my group. You need to say what your lie is, have it judged on believability, have the appropriate DC set, and then roll at it. You don't necessarily have to RP it out if you had some sort of crippling social disorder, but a "I tell him [I]X[/I]" would be necessary. I'd potentially allow others players to help or give advice if your mental stats were high enough (as that character is probably better than any single member of the group, I have little problem letting players team up occasionally). I'm not saying that you should play differently. I hope that's not what you're getting from this. I'm saying that you're not playing in any invalid way, but neither are the people you're arguing against. It comes down to what works for a group. Groups usually play their preferences, and usually have reasons for doing so. You may not agree with the reasons, but they sure aren't going to have less fun because of your disagreements. This is my experience too, for new gamers (or gamers new to a particular system). I have a list of 5 things to go over your character before you start to mechanically create him. Number 5 is "making sure that the player can play the character" and it's one of the more important rules. It doesn't mean you need to play to the same level as the character. It means that you need to be able to lie if you're lying, to be Lawful if you're a monk, be forgiving if you're playing a forgiving priest. I know that some in this thread might strongly disagree with that, but D&D is not escapism for me or my group. It is not a place to go to create the Alternate Better Me. It is a game we play, with the intention of having fun, and often times with the intent of exploring new points of view, or to see what it's like to have another outlook on life. While my 5th rule does limit this exploration, if you can't play that type of character anyway, then it won't go over well even without that rule. You won't know what a Lawful monk is actually like if you can't be play a Lawful character. Our mileage has varied, etc. etc. I know this is true for many people, but I'll disagree from my group's experience with it. I think we have yet to experience a traditional dungeon delve. Traps are rare things indeed. Maybe our group is just made up of very different people (I suspect it is), but this sounds so fringe to me. If they're just lightly socially inept, then I hold that they can absolutely improve at making up lies or diplomatically dealing with NPCs. That's something they'll need advice on, need to practice, need reminders on, and maybe even need to state from a more detached viewpoint "I'll compliment him on his castle" rather than a more flowery description in-character complimenting the fountain, architecture, etc. If, however, someone is highly socially inept, then it's a lot more fringe to me. Yeah, it'll be easier for them to learn Cleave then to be charismatic. I still hold that they can learn what types of lies might be good or bad, or that bowing in most games is universally understood as some sort of sign of respect. I don't believe, however, that if they're so socially inept that they cannot learn these basic things, that they should be playing with your average group. And that is not to ostracize them, but because if their social leaning is really that inept, that interactions with most people in general will have problems, and that people trained in the correct areas are best at changing this, not your average D&D group. If they're somewhere in between, then I think it scales appropriately. No, but you can just as easily give them tips and advice: "OK, you're a noble diplomat, the best skills at this level would be A, B and C if you want to continue on your current path..." or, "You can attempt to lie to the duke, but you did find out earlier that he knows who paid for the assassin, or you can try to intimidate him, since you found out about his illegitimate son that he's been trying to hide from his wife..." or, "you learned you're going to be talking to a king in your next adventure and he especially hates elves, so bringing in your elven goods and singing your songs in elven like you normally do may not be a good idea." Again, I see no reason not to give advice to both. It's been the standard in my group from the get-go (even if we're much better at it now than we used to be). As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Are things like Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy too easy?
Top