Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 7733355" data-attributes="member: 467"><p>"We try to convince the baron to write us a letter so we can get to the capital without being molested by guards" does not need to be handled terribly differently in the game rules than "We try to move down the hallways without setting off any of the pressure plates so we can get to the treasure without being pinioned with poison darts" or "we try to cut our way through the orc line so we can get to the necromancer without having our life force sucked out." Each one represents a bunch of steps and challenges that are based on the capabilities of the PC as written on the character sheet, guided by the strategies and tactics of the players. The problem with treating the first as special, requiring convincing statements, is that it becomes a game of "GM May I?" very quickly. Imagine the opposite where the outcome of combat was determined by how well you described your attacks and feints and was based primarily on whether the GM liked what you said, what their mood was and whether their kids had really rankled them that day. It doesn't make sense for combat (in a game not built around narrative devices, I mean) so it should not make any more sense in a social challenge or a non-combat skill challenge. Players should not have to be adept orators in order to play a con man any more than they should have to know how to fence in order to play a swashbuckler.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification