Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 2224690" data-attributes="member: 3887">In the case of combat, I let the roll decide the outcome.In the case of social interactions, I consider both the roll and the actual player input. Sometimes the roll decides it, sometimes it influences it, and in rare cases, its irrelevant to the outcome.   You said yourself that you factor in both the roll and the roleplaying. So in general principle, we do the same thing. Its just a question of degree. You wouldn't let pure roleplaying supercede a die roll, I would. My players put ranks in social skills because they don't always have clever ideas. Ranks in Bluff and Diplomacy are dependable. Just because a character with no ranks succeeds occasionally doesn't mean spending points on these skills is useless. Plus, we don't play out every social interaction. Most of the time we leave things abstract and handle things purely through mechanics (shopping, rumor gathering, ect.)Considered another way, social skills become another species of tactics. And the rules don't really address tactics (that's entirely player choice). In other words, sometimes its the bard comes up with the winning battle plan, not the veteran fighter. And sometimes its barbarian who somehow finds the most convincing words. I'm not going to disallow a player's strategy because I can't make it jive, exactly, with their character sheet. Ultimately this game is played through thinking and talking. I do what I can to encourage that. Is it fair? I have no idea. No-ones complained so far.</blockquote>

Verification