D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

[technoextreme]

No not really.

In terms of CaGI, it doesn't matter how many times the BBEG/former teammate has seen you pull the same tired stunt, they walk up to you anyway because "This time she'll let me kick the football for sure!"

So explain to me why football players keep on doing it if it becomes ineffective on a weekly basis. Closest thing we've got to gladitorial combat and yet come and get it obviously gets used.

I believe you mean alt-f4 and that trick won't work on me no matter how often you try, how sincere you seem, or the apparent reward. Because I know what the key combination actually does I won't fall for it. I "auto-save".

I'm fairly certain that you aren't smart enough to know every key combination in every game from which there would be an unintended side effect.

 

[Sunseeker]

Even if it directly against the character concept you developed for the PC?

Chaste paladin?
Devoted husband and father?
different sexual-orientation?

And it not a character ability -- it's a player/GM ability to say "You couldn't help yourself so you made the first move"?

"The beatuy and charm of the handsome swashbuckler was so overwhelming, you didn't even realize you were talking until you'd already had several drinks together and he was inviting you up to his private room."
--what happened here?
--The game mechanics made you do something against your will: get friendly with the swashbuckler.
--The game mechanics left you room for a choice: go with him or not?

No, you didn't make the first move, the seducer in question worked their charms on you. Maybe they batted an eyelash, flashed a sexy leg or exposed a tanned, muscular chest and shot you a glinting smile from their stubble bordered mouth.

They enticed you to make a move towards them, maybe your first intention wasn't to jump their bones, but once you started talking(and drinking) well...

A chase paladin(male or female) might receive a bonus to ignoring the enticing looks. Saying something in the event is likely to have your DM consider such favorably.
Devoted husband and father? Alone? At the bar? Late at night? Me thinks trouble with the miss'!
Different sexual orientation doesn't belie attraction or come-on attempts. It just makes them easier to rebuke.

I doubt the "skill" says "If you succeed in this charm, the player does whatever you want forever." The use of the skill just needs to be specific, "The beautiful barmaid bats her eyes at you just before she turns away, sauntering down the tables, as though enticing you to follow her." ----Roll contested will.

 

[Sunseeker]

The GM adjudication is better for me because the GM can respond believably to the situation and character premise.

Slippery slope. If the DM could do everything, why do we need rules for anything?

 

[TwoSix]

But that is even more pf a problem for me because the power then doesn't represent anything. It is an effect witing for an explanation. If you are into making things flow like a movie, that probably works. But not everyone plays the game that way.

I don't doubt it's a problem for you. Never have.

But I have a problem with all of the people (not you in particular) who think that these things shouldn't happen simply because they're only used to playing another way.

There's nothing wrong with cinematic, narrative games. I'm sorry you don't like those kinds of games. And I'm sorry that you had to be exposed to it because you bought a new edition of a game you liked.

 

[Nagol]

My assumption would be there are penalties to the roll for an unwilling target.


Are we talking about a real power here? Or are we extrapolating for CaGI?

So a metagame resource that can make an external character fall in love with your character? No problem in theory, although the fictional positioning would be interesting to narrate.

Extrapolation I think.

The fictional positioning is given to you by the player who exercised the power. you just have to accept the result. It is in effect "You fall madly for X. [Fade to black]. In the morning, you realise you can't go on without her."

I'd have a problem with it.

 

[Obryn]

But this is still a matter of choice. I choose to remain where I am or I suffer the consequences of being struck by a dire boar. My moving is a product of me not wanting to get run over by a boar, not the power of your words to compel me to move.

That's just it, though - spells like Cause Fear don't let you choose how to respond to "being afraid." Taunt and Feint mechanics, and contests of will in general, recognize that PCs and NPCs are not robots, can be wrong-footed, and can be tricked.

-O

 

[Sunseeker]

Extrapolation I think.

The fictional positioning is given to you by the player who exercised the power. you just have to accept the result. It is in effect "You fall madly for X. [Fade to black]. In the morning, you realise you can't go on without her."

I'd have a problem with it.

That's somewhat of an exaggeration don't you think? CAGI is used to determine limited-time, short-duration, immediate actions. Bob uses CAGI so Wingus and Dingus attack him. Charmer uses Hypothetical Power and you sleep with them and then can't live without them forever.

Little different there. The former is a temporary contest of wills. The fighter taunts, the orcs fail their attempt to ignore the insult and attack.
The latter is a life-long curse wherein you become wrapped around their little finger.

Bit of a jump no?

 

[TwoSix]

Extrapolation I think.

The fictional positioning is given to you by the player who exercised the power. you just have to accept the result. It is in effect "You fall madly for X. [Fade to black]. In the morning, you realise you can't go on without her."

I'd have a problem with it.

Dominate person?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Because as a DM, I don't want to have to do it unless absolutely necessary. Create NPCs, create encounters, stage battles, sure. Figure out what happens? Constantly trying to figure out how to associate fiction->rules->fiction is tiring.

Well, it is tiring. Because DMing is tiring.

I find it hard to see how creating monsters and staging battles is more a part of DMing that making judgment calls.

Either we freeform it or the rules should handle as much as possible, and I'll criticize the rules based on how well they do the job of making those assocations easy for me.

I guess I don't the the rules as being about making things easier.

Are we talking about a real power here? Or are we extrapolating for CaGI?

Extrapolating. I was trying to ascertain whether affecting different behavior in different contexts would create an issue where CaGI did not. For you, it apparently didn't.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Slippery slope. If the DM could do everything, why do we need rules for anything?

We don't. This is a classic example of need vs. want. You don't need rules to rp. The entire ruleset is optional (which is why most people change and ignore it so much).