Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 3383368" data-attributes="member: 3887">Only for players who would have done that anyway. I doubt it would have effect on players' whose focus is on character modeling. At least that's been my experience (I do really run my games like this)  Play the game the way you like to. If that means your contributions at the table don't necessarily reflect what's on your character sheet, so what? I'm not going to tell a player 'Great idea, but Thud never would have though of it'. I can think of no better way of discouraging engaged and creative play. Which is far bigger concern for me that discouraging dump-statting.Short answer based on principle: when it comes to  player input, no.Longer answer based on mechanics: the benefits received from dump-statting and substituting a players social and analytical skills for their characters aren't significant in the larger context of the task resolution system as a whole. Now that's what I find that problematic. It favors character builds over character's built over time in response to in-game events. Sometimes this is unavoidable, but not in the cases where the player and character skills overlap. Take a character that wasn't designed to be a leader (low CHR, wrong class skill set), but becomes one through events in play (and because the player's been on a roll with extemporized speeches). They will never be a good as one designed for that role from the start. Unless the DM looks the other when it comes to certain skill checks.Now you can say 'Fine, that's the way it should work. You're stuck with the role you initially chose. Too bad. That'll learn you for trying to have your character grow in response to the events that actually happend in the campaign'.</blockquote>

Verification