Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5899324" data-attributes="member: 2067">I think you're getting close to the heart of the matter, but I think you're missing one component.Pre 4e, exploration and interaction were also handled via various spells. Now, I think it's very possible to expand those other two pillars without necessarily adding much extra material, but using the tools we already have.Your Will defense in combat also works in Interaction. Your Fortitude defense in combat also works in Exploration. Your skills can work as weapons do in combat (Diplomacy Proficiency: +3 to social roles, crit on 19-20). Your powers/spells/abilities can apply to those pillars, too (maybe you can learn something like a non-magical Charm Person with Diplomacy, or a non-magical Invisibility with Stealth). So if you fight an orc, you're making sword attacks against their armor. If you hide from an orc, you're making Stealth rolls against their Will. If you need to flee through the forest, maybe you're making Endurance rolls against the forest's general difficulty (while its making rolls against your Fortitude to stop you early). Rather than dismissing and piling together the social and exploration dimensions of the game, we need to put back in proficiencies and powers and complex interactions in that field. Because if you go to a player that loves interaction, and tell them they can only make d20 rolls, it's a lot like going to a player that loves combat, and telling them they can only play fighters who only make basic attacks. It's just not going to engage them like they need to be engaged.D&D has always had a struggle with the noncombat aspects of the game, so this isn't really something that looking back on the history of the game will necessarily help with. This demands new innovation. But there are aspects of the game that can help inform this (skills/nonweapon proficiencies, and rituals/noncombat magic, specifically).</blockquote>

Verification