Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Issues with Social Skills: Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="fuzzlewump" data-source="post: 5084166" data-attributes="member: 63214"><p>(Hypothetical) I feel like if D&D really wanted to go the route of no matter if you succeed or fail, it's fun! then a lot of skills shouldn't really exist. Why would you want to be a bard with his +diplomacy ability when it doesn't really matter if you succeed or fail? If both routes are going to interesting, might as well not even get any social stat or skill. What's the point of changing the probability of paths if both are going to way-super-awesome?</p><p></p><p>Here are some possible different reasons why structures like skills and abilities that increase your probability of succeeding at a skill exist, and I would appreciate anyone's insight: </p><p></p><p>1. People <em>want </em>to succeed at what they are trying to do, even if failing would be interesting too. They aren't reading a book, and so some players will want to succeed at everything they do, going to measures like just letting the guy with diplomacy talk. Even if, to outsiders reading the scenario like a book, it seems boring.</p><p></p><p>2. Failing, a lot of the time, is not fun in published adventures, and may take a lot of work to become fun, and takes a lot of work outside of published adventures to be sure that every conflict has at least two fun outcomes. This is especially true for skills like "Climb" and whatnot, the physical skills. Climbing up a cliff or a wall and then falling isn't fun, unless by falling you smash open the floor and a new room is open. That's a good idea actually. But it would become stale if used a lot. </p><p></p><p>3. Failure <em>should</em> <em>not </em>be fun. That's why you can die in combat, and that's why you have feats, abilities, weapons, etc etc to make sure you <em>don't </em>die. It's what the game is based on in a way. People can dying fun, maybe, but that's probably not the intent. (Or is it?!)</p><p></p><p>4. People will think of a concept and create it, no matter how crappy it may be in the system. If they want to be a smoothtalker, they will make it, even if it doesn't really have any effect on the outcome of the <em>game.</em> (Different from the outcome of the story.)</p><p></p><p>5. People want the story to go their way, and will get the skills and abilities necesarry to make sure that happens. Sure, they'll have fun even if they fail, but their primary goal is swing things their way. This actually seems like the best answer, to me, but it's also hard to pin down.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="fuzzlewump, post: 5084166, member: 63214"] (Hypothetical) I feel like if D&D really wanted to go the route of no matter if you succeed or fail, it's fun! then a lot of skills shouldn't really exist. Why would you want to be a bard with his +diplomacy ability when it doesn't really matter if you succeed or fail? If both routes are going to interesting, might as well not even get any social stat or skill. What's the point of changing the probability of paths if both are going to way-super-awesome? Here are some possible different reasons why structures like skills and abilities that increase your probability of succeeding at a skill exist, and I would appreciate anyone's insight: 1. People [I]want [/I]to succeed at what they are trying to do, even if failing would be interesting too. They aren't reading a book, and so some players will want to succeed at everything they do, going to measures like just letting the guy with diplomacy talk. Even if, to outsiders reading the scenario like a book, it seems boring. 2. Failing, a lot of the time, is not fun in published adventures, and may take a lot of work to become fun, and takes a lot of work outside of published adventures to be sure that every conflict has at least two fun outcomes. This is especially true for skills like "Climb" and whatnot, the physical skills. Climbing up a cliff or a wall and then falling isn't fun, unless by falling you smash open the floor and a new room is open. That's a good idea actually. But it would become stale if used a lot. 3. Failure [I]should[/I] [I]not [/I]be fun. That's why you can die in combat, and that's why you have feats, abilities, weapons, etc etc to make sure you [I]don't [/I]die. It's what the game is based on in a way. People can dying fun, maybe, but that's probably not the intent. (Or is it?!) 4. People will think of a concept and create it, no matter how crappy it may be in the system. If they want to be a smoothtalker, they will make it, even if it doesn't really have any effect on the outcome of the [I]game.[/I] (Different from the outcome of the story.) 5. People want the story to go their way, and will get the skills and abilities necesarry to make sure that happens. Sure, they'll have fun even if they fail, but their primary goal is swing things their way. This actually seems like the best answer, to me, but it's also hard to pin down. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Issues with Social Skills: Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate
Top