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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IronWolf" data-source="post: 5715182" data-attributes="member: 21076">I readily admit I am one of the people relatively happy with the D&D skill system. I attribute a lot of that because I treat them as guidelines and do not feel tied to them to the degree it seems some do. So, keeping in mind my perspective...Your system sounds very similar to things we already have as tools and easily fits within the framework of the existing skill system.Browbeat = IntimidateDeceive = BluffReason = DiplomacySeduction = Diplomacy, Bluff, Charisma check?So taking Inspector Javert from your example, as long as a GM I know a little bit about his motivations, probably just a line or to I can immediately adjust on the fly for any myriad of circumstances that could arise. All without needing to add more mechanics and categories to the mix.Come at him with an emotional plea? Well my one-liner background mentions he is cool and calculating, so their would be a negative modifier to someone coming up to use something like seduction. But if someone comes up and tries to bluff via authority? That just might warrant a positive modifier.The same seems to go for the further examples in the Added Complexity section. These are all things (racism, affinity to jewelry, etc, etc) that seem like they would be a small note for the character. These characteristics would affect modifiers similar to above - still within the current skill framework.If you have a player that plays a charismatic character but is a bit of an introvert himself, then you can still drop hints for them to help see how to resolve the interaction. Still without needing to categorize all the actions.So I guess I am not sure how one can't accomplish what you have described within the existing skill resolution framework?</blockquote>

Verification