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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Flamestrike" data-source="post: 6827129" data-attributes="member: 6788736">This comes down to a fundamental difference in ruling social skills more than anything else.I certainly allow social skills to influence NPCs (and expect PCs to roleplay social skill use on them - awarding inspiration if they do it well). I'm just selective about when I allow a roll (a DM is only to allow a roll when the result is in doubt - otherwise the attempt either auto fails or auto succeeds).If my wealthy and charming (Cha 16, expertise in persuasion) heroic Swashbuckler wants to charm a tavern wench who isnt important to the story, then he gets to make a persuasion check to charm her. If I determine that she's dead broke and he is being ostentatious with money, or shes sick of the dull town in the middle of nowhere and he's promising her a life of luxury and glamor (or something similar), then I might give him advantage on the check, or just grant automatic success. Might also call for a deception check (knowing our swashbuckler) also! If (OTOH) I the DM know that she's not intrested and never will be for whatever reason, no amount of rolling is going to change her mind.I read from your post above that you always let players roll, and they dictate to you when they roll a skill. I take a different approach personally; players only roll for skills when called for by the DM. I either allow the roll if there is a chance of success, forbid the roll if there is none, grant auto success if its something the player should be able to do automatically, or occasionally roll the check myself (ar let the player do a blind roll) behind the screen when I want the result to be a secret.If you roll at my table, it means something - and affects the narrative if you succeed.</blockquote>

Verification