Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 5732064" data-attributes="member: 54710">I agree that this is the crux.  I think the essential difference is that the people I play with are really persuasive and have pretty decent deductive powers.  Allowing them to replace those player abilities with character abilities would totally ruin the fun.  Persuading NPCs with role-playing (with a nod to differences in diplomacy) and puzzling out mysteries (with the higher information characters getting more clues) is part of why we play.  It's why no-combat sessions outnumber combat sessions by a significant majority.That having been said, I agree with you that it's important for character abilities to be there as a replacement to player abilities that aren't fun for those players.  My players don't really enjoy tracking names.  So, when an important NPC was mentioned in a letter with a matronymic instead of a patronymic, I pointed it out.  (Their out-of-game chances of recognizing a female arabic name over a male arabic name were low, even though their character's would recognize it in a second.  I think I would have more fun if my players could pick this up, but I want my game to be fun for the players I have.)But this is why I disagree with the "always" proposition.  I'm not saying it's wrong for your game (you know that best), but that kind of design would seriously damage mine.-KS</blockquote>