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="silburnl" data-source="post: 1315745" data-attributes="member: 13560">The two traditional extremes for this issue are: (i) Do it all by role-playing, in which case players who put resources into social attributes for their characters feel short-changed (since they achieve the same effects with zero ranks as with ten ranks and a feat) and players who don't have much inspiration when it comes to interpersonal interaction end up playing highly charismatic leader types as utter lumps.(ii) Do it all by roll-playing, in which case interactions with NPCs will probably descend to an utterly flat "I roll a Bluff total of 23" "That easily beats his Sense Motive of 11. You're through to the throneroom." Which makes many folk wonder why we should call them role-playing games.One alternative way of handling things is to roll off at the start and then role-play through the result. Players who create characters with the stats, feats and skills for sociability will get to play through more winning situations than those with the "Axe! Smash!" characters and you get the fun of figuring out how to convert the results of the rolls into a social interaction that does them justice (especially when it comes to the 'against the run of play' results) - it also avoids having a stellar piece of role-playing turn into "well that was menacing as all get out and you'd have convinced me, but then you rolled a 3 while those three hayseeds rolled a 19 so they're coming for you anyway".The problem with this approach is that it changes the play sequence from declaration-roll-result to roll-result-declaration, which can be a bit wierd for some groups. Also some players (including DMs as players for this purpose) find it difficult to 'play to fail' for an encounter they are preordained by the dice to lose.Leaving aside this however and returning to the original poster, while I take his point about not wanting to accept various wierd and wonderful feats and prestige classes from who-knows-how-many dodgy third party supplements I think his player has a valid point regarding the lack of options for interpersonal types. According to the core books a 'face' has five or six skills to choose from, some +2/+2 feats for those skills and the 'Leadership' feat once they get to 6th level. Compared to what combat, magic and stealth specialists get its pretty thin and there's a case to be made for some more crunchy bits to support the niche. The upthread suggestion to look to D20 Modern for ideas is a good one I think, also Dynasties & Demagogues from Atlas' Penumbra line has a good selection of crunch for building intriguers/politicians. Ultimately you are the DM however and you get to decide how your world works in order to maximise fun for everyone.RegardsLuke</blockquote>

Verification