DMs, Do You Pander To Player Skills?

[jodyjohnson]

Yes.

I try to pander within reason for my campaign.

In the campaign I play in, our party was aggressively pursued (at knife point) by 3 separate factions to lead a very significant expedition to a lost elven temple religiously guarded by halflings in the jungle. We were told up front that negotiation would be required.

None of us read or spoke elvish, none spoke halfling (campaign specific), no one had survival, and we were lower level than all the NPCs we dealt with (We were 2nd). At 2nd our diplomacy was not reliable.

The NPC who went with us ended up speaking halfling, elvish, was a diplomat and of course higher level than us. It was like being power-levelled in a MMORPG.

Why did they want us?

At least some of the time, adventurers should succeed where other do not because they have the right abilities for the job.

 

[Arnwyn]

In otherwords, if players have invested ranks in a skill, particularly an 'obscure' skill, do you try to ensure they have an opportunity to use it?

As a DM? No, never. It's up to the players to choose appropriate skills that they think will be useful, and then find times to use them in the campaign.

The cool part is, I've never needed to consciously put in opportunities for PCs to use their skills - there have always been loads of times in which a massive number of skills are useful in the games I run. I've never needed to "ensure" that an opportunity presents itself.

So, my real answer is: the issue has never come up, and won't ever come up.

 

[painandgreed]

Sort of, I won't change things just so they can use it, but if they want to use it, I'll give them the opportunity. If they bult up an ultrahigh Appraise, I wouldn't change items in the adventure but I would allow them to head to markets in search of forgotten treasures. If they had forgery, i wouldn't work forgery into the curent adventure anymore than I normally would, but I might inform them of the possible uses that they could use forgery on outside of the adventure or offer forgery based adventures next for them to persue if they wanted to. I wouldn't work a nautical theme in just because they took Profesion (Sailor) but I wouldn't stop them from going on a nautical adventure of their own chooseing.

 

[diaglo]

As a DM? No, never. It's up to the players to choose appropriate skills that they think will be useful, and then find times to use them in the campaign.

The cool part is, I've never needed to consciously put in opportunities for PCs to use their skills - there have always been loads of times in which a massive number of skills are useful in the games I run. I've never needed to "ensure" that an opportunity presents itself.

So, my real answer is: the issue has never come up, and won't ever come up.

ditto. that's what my first reply to this thread meant too.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

As a DM, I look at it the other way round - it's my responsibility to throw things in that require skill rolls, so if someone has the appropriate skills they get an advantage (or are just better able to accomplish something along the way), and if nobody has the required skill, too bad.

I'm with you up until the "if nobody has the required skill, too bad."

Because, honestly, I'm lazy. If nobody has the required skill, I don't bother throwing anything in that requires that skill, because I'm not making this stuff up for my own amusement: I'm making it up so that the players can see it. If none of them are going to be able to see it, why would I waste my time on it?

So I don't really pander to their characters' skills, because I don't go out of my way to set up situations where their skills are highlighted. But I also keep track of what those skills are, so that when I'm designing encounters and plots I know that I should be thinking about what a character with "Knowledge: Nobility" or "Profession: Scribe" might be able to do with it and plan an appropriate response. And if nobody has Appraise, then I don't worry about what Appraise might or might not reveal, because no one's ever going to find out anyway.

--
conservation of energy in all things
ryan

 

[Sejs]

Yes I do.

The players pick skills that are appropriate to their character concept, and I as DM do my best to ensure that each player has fun playing their character.


Fun, Awesomeness, and Cubes. S'what it's all about.

 

[drnuncheon]

I absolutely do my best to make sure that a player's choices - of skill, class, and background - become important. Otherwise the player has wasted skill points, time, and effort. I hate it when players make me waste time and effort, so I show them the same courtesy.

It's the same theory as not running an undead-heavy campaign for a group of rogues.

J

 

[Munin]

I provide opportunities for characters to use their skills, but if the player doesn't pick up on it, that's their problem.
I make it a habit to collect character sheets between adventures just for this purpose: so the adventure is more closely tailored to the skills and abilities of the party. Not perfectly tailored, but close.
Of course, the players swear that I take the sheets to better plan their demise, and I'm perfectly happy with letting that assumption continue.

 

[The_Gneech]

Occasionally, maybe once every few sessions. As has been said, I set up the opportunity, and let the players do the rest. Occasionally, they send exactly the wrong person for the job ... like in the Deadlands d20 session where the Mad Scientist tried to have a shootout with a local Gunfighter. Um ... duh?

-The Gneech

 

[Umbran]

I'm another "within reason" type.

As P-cat said, the game is about the players having fun, and if they have skills and abilities they feel are neat enough to invest in that don't get used, they have less fun. I mean, imagine if a PC take the Hunter of the Dead prestige class, and then you never again use undead in the campaign? What fun is that for them? Skills are the same idea on somewhat smaller scale.

That being said, if they take a skill that's obscure - like Knowledge (Trading Card Games) or Craft (Underwater Basketweaving), I'm not goign to go too far out of my way. If the ranger insists on taking a favored enemy that I have already says does not exist in the game, he'll be sorely disappointed. And so on.