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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5084250" data-attributes="member: 18280">IME, the opposite is true.  Sacrificing the "summer camp director" meme (from 2e) has had a beneficial effect.It differs from mine, but then I only require checks when the outcome is in doubt, and I don't necessarily have the players roll them (or even know that they have been rolled).  Sometimes I just use the raw numbers as a guide to roleplaying NPCs.  I certainly do not allow "I roll a Diplomacy check!" without more information that that.I also allow skills like Diplomacy to have combat benefits, such as being able to improve your AC by making a foe less willing to hit you, or intimidating so as to improve the effect of a blow.  And, yes, you have to describe how you want the skill to apply.A low Charisma/poor Diplomacy may encourage players to keep silent -- but only if you allow PCs to avoid all conversation in the first place.  Towns divide parties, IME, and many times PCs will have to be their own spokesperson, whether they like it or not.  Certainly, the town watch shouldn't simply turn to the party "face".In short, if the DM has a responsibility to let the PCs can win or fail on their own merits, and to give the players plenty of opportunities to make meaningful choices, the DM also has a responsibility to make sure that the NPCs treat the PCs as individuals.......whether this is the easiest thing for the party to handle or not.Certainly, trolls do not stop pursuing the PCs because they reach a cliff and have to send the "climb face" up first.  Neither should the town watch particularly care who the "social face" is (although their reaction to the social face may help the others).RC</blockquote>

Verification