Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 4981158" data-attributes="member: 58197">The skill check can be avoided only if the DM chooses not to call for a skill check. In that case, it's on the DM to account for the character's social skills.As for the result of the skill check being wildly inconsistent with the proposition made in RP: This is a possibility, admitted, and it's why Charisma is the hardest of the mental stats to define in a way that doesn't constrain RP. Nevertheless, it can be done. If Charisma is defined not in terms of the player's actions but in terms of the character's presence and charm, then its effect on the skill check can be seen in that light.If you have a low Charisma, you may have made an eminently reasonable proposition (player actions result in a low DC on the Diplomacy check), but something about the way you presented it (character presence implied by Charisma) just grates on the other guy's nerves, so he refuses (your Charisma penalty means you fail the roll despite the low DC).Or, if you have a high Charisma, you may have made an absurd proposition (player actions result in a high DC on the Diplomacy check), but you delivered it so smoothly and charmingly (character presence implied by Charisma) that you pull it off anyway and the guy agrees (your Charisma bonus means you succeed despite the high DC).That's why, as I said upthread, a DM needs to separate content from delivery when dealing with the social skills. The content of a social interaction - the terms of the deal offered, the factual claim made, the points hit in the speech - should be factored into the DC of the skill check. The delivery - smooth or halting, eloquent or inarticulate - should not. It's fuzzier than I think a good rules system ought to be, but I don't see a way around it.That depends on how you define the stat in question. If you define the Intelligence stat as "how smart you are," then yeah, it has to be accounted for in RP. If you define it as "general knowledge," then no, it does not have to be accounted for in RP; it is entirely handled within the skill system.I prefer the latter definition, because I think it's much cleaner and more useful. It lets the rules be rules and the RP be RP. If you want good results on your knowledge skill checks and wizard spells, you take a high Int. If you don't, you don't, and that's the end of it.There's a reason why the mechanical impact of alignment has been steadily reduced, edition after edition, to the point that it affects virtually nothing in 4E. It's because, at least in my experience, subjective roleplaying-related concepts and hard bright-line mechanical systems don't mix well. Witness the endless arguments over How To Play A Paladin.I said the player, not the character. The PLAYER is not supposed to have monster stats memorized or go digging for them in the Monster Manual during play. If some players choose to memorize the MM, then it is incumbent upon them to segregate that knowledge; just like, if you're walking past me to get a drink and happen to glimpse my hand in a card game, you should avoid exploiting what you saw.</blockquote>

Verification