Remathilis
Legend
Wow. Just wow.
A couple of points I'd like to make.
1.) Auto Failure.
It's absolutely blowing my mind there are DMs who think that using intimidate to secure trust and aid from a local lord is not only viable, but acceptable. Its like trying to hammer in a nail with a screwdriver. I'm surprised if there wasn't a 6th line: Initiative (very easy): the noble is surprised as the PCs draw steel, so he summons his guards.
I'm all for creative OotB thinking, but I do think there are some skill checks that shouldn't succeed. You can't intimidate someone into trusting you, you can't make a jump check leap over a mountain, and you can't impress a local lord with your stealth check (BOO!)
2.) Railroading.
This phrase you keep using, I do not think it mean what you think it means. Railroading is when the PCs are powerless from changing the plot, regardless of any option. If the noble MUST live so that he can do something important and the PCs cannot lay a finger on him for that reason, that's railroading. Deciding that a certain skill or skills only work in a particular combination or that the NPC has a particular agenda he will be furthering no matter how smooth/suave/menacing the PCs are IS NOT RAILROADING, ITS ADDING TO THE PLOT.
Remember kids: if your standing still and the plot keeps moving, your on a railroad. If you walk up to a T section and are miffed you can't go straight, that NOT railroading, that's limiting your particular options at that junction.
3.) successes and failures
This is great IMHO. I can play social meetings like encounters. Each "round" the PCs describe their actions, and one of them roles. Their success/failure in that given round moves the conversation in that direction. It allows a round-to-round structure and keeps the game from turning into "8 people talk. one person rolls diplomacy. You roll a 2, you fail to impress the duke. No retries." Instead, you know if things are going good or bad as they advance, and the multiple rolls allow more chances to succeed on the dice, rather than one "save or fail" skill check.
A couple of points I'd like to make.
1.) Auto Failure.
It's absolutely blowing my mind there are DMs who think that using intimidate to secure trust and aid from a local lord is not only viable, but acceptable. Its like trying to hammer in a nail with a screwdriver. I'm surprised if there wasn't a 6th line: Initiative (very easy): the noble is surprised as the PCs draw steel, so he summons his guards.
I'm all for creative OotB thinking, but I do think there are some skill checks that shouldn't succeed. You can't intimidate someone into trusting you, you can't make a jump check leap over a mountain, and you can't impress a local lord with your stealth check (BOO!)
2.) Railroading.
This phrase you keep using, I do not think it mean what you think it means. Railroading is when the PCs are powerless from changing the plot, regardless of any option. If the noble MUST live so that he can do something important and the PCs cannot lay a finger on him for that reason, that's railroading. Deciding that a certain skill or skills only work in a particular combination or that the NPC has a particular agenda he will be furthering no matter how smooth/suave/menacing the PCs are IS NOT RAILROADING, ITS ADDING TO THE PLOT.
Remember kids: if your standing still and the plot keeps moving, your on a railroad. If you walk up to a T section and are miffed you can't go straight, that NOT railroading, that's limiting your particular options at that junction.
3.) successes and failures
This is great IMHO. I can play social meetings like encounters. Each "round" the PCs describe their actions, and one of them roles. Their success/failure in that given round moves the conversation in that direction. It allows a round-to-round structure and keeps the game from turning into "8 people talk. one person rolls diplomacy. You roll a 2, you fail to impress the duke. No retries." Instead, you know if things are going good or bad as they advance, and the multiple rolls allow more chances to succeed on the dice, rather than one "save or fail" skill check.