Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shardstone" data-source="post: 9428807" data-attributes="member: 6807784">But that doesn't tell you what a &quot;hard bluff&quot; is, which wil lalmost always be decided by the in-game scenario. For most skills I'm down with what you suggest, but for the Influence skills, it IMO is not worthwhile trying to break down the complexity of human interaction into small and easily decided categories. It requires fundamentally reducing social interaction instead of allowing it to expand on itself, which is required. In this case, a lighter rule is better for gameplay then a more strict rule. And if a strict rule were to be provided, it would likely have ot be ignored because of how useless it is.Is it an easy bluff is my dwarf is talking to another dwarf? What about cultural differences? What about personal differences? What are the biases of each dwarf? How do the dwarfs talk? Does iteven matter if they are the same species? These questions can't be answered for every combination of character, and so all you can really say is &quot;If you think they'll have an easy time, DC 10; otherwise, DC 15. If you think it's a crapshoot, disadvantage or DC 20.&quot; Now you can build a powreful, robust, and fun social system, but doing so in the PHB will noticably bend the game around it. Now we need feats, class features, and items that key to this new system, which expands all the classes with more features and options, which expands page count and makes the game bigger. It becomes then a cost/benefit analysis of, do you want the game to have Social Interaction on par with combat, do you want to reduce both systems to hit the page count, or do you want to reduce one system to hit the page count. WotC have elected for the final option which, IMO, is the best option for THEM personally.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shardstone, post: 9428807, member: 6807784"] But that doesn't tell you what a "hard bluff" is, which wil lalmost always be decided by the in-game scenario. For most skills I'm down with what you suggest, but for the Influence skills, it IMO is not worthwhile trying to break down the complexity of human interaction into small and easily decided categories. It requires fundamentally reducing social interaction instead of allowing it to expand on itself, which is required. In this case, a lighter rule is better for gameplay then a more strict rule. And if a strict rule were to be provided, it would likely have ot be ignored because of how useless it is. Is it an easy bluff is my dwarf is talking to another dwarf? What about cultural differences? What about personal differences? What are the biases of each dwarf? How do the dwarfs talk? Does iteven matter if they are the same species? These questions can't be answered for every combination of character, and so all you can really say is "If you think they'll have an easy time, DC 10; otherwise, DC 15. If you think it's a crapshoot, disadvantage or DC 20." Now you can build a powreful, robust, and fun social system, but doing so in the PHB will noticably bend the game around it. Now we need feats, class features, and items that key to this new system, which expands all the classes with more features and options, which expands page count and makes the game bigger. It becomes then a cost/benefit analysis of, do you want the game to have Social Interaction on par with combat, do you want to reduce both systems to hit the page count, or do you want to reduce one system to hit the page count. WotC have elected for the final option which, IMO, is the best option for THEM personally. [/QUOTE]

Verification