Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Olgar Shiverstone" data-source="post: 5606353" data-attributes="member: 5868">I agree and disagree.&nbsp; With a fair DM and players deep into RP, you don't need rules for RP -- players just do it, and the DM makes a ruling about the outcome, and you continue.But for less experienced players, or for players whose social skills are at a significant disconnect with their characters' social skills, it helps to have some rules to handle the resolution of roleplay.&nbsp; That tests the *character's* skills, not the player's.In a &quot;modular&quot; rules approach, I'd make RP resolution optional (&quot;basic&quot;), so you can do without, but provide a resolution mechanic (like the current Diplomacy, Bluff or other Charisma checks) for when you want granular resolution (&quot;Advanced&quot;).I prefer to DM a mixed approach, myself.&nbsp; If the player says &quot;I use diplomacy&quot;, they have to roleplay it out.&nbsp; But no matter how well or poorly the *player* RPs the situation, the *in character* outcome is determined by the die roll (though with a potential +/-2 modifier for my assessment of good/bad RP contribution).&nbsp; So the buffoon player playing the suave character isn't handicapped, and the suave player playing the buffoon character comes off that way as well.&nbsp; And sometimes the dice hate you and you put your foot in your mouth.Add puzzle solving, while we're at it.&nbsp; It's a historical part of D&amp;D, though admittedly one that is very difficult to pull off well.&nbsp; In fact, I'd submit that a good puzzle is the hardest thing for a DM to pull off, as you need to simultaneously provide a challenge that is both appropriate for the players as well as their characters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Olgar Shiverstone, post: 5606353, member: 5868"] I agree and disagree. With a fair DM and players deep into RP, you don't need rules for RP -- players just do it, and the DM makes a ruling about the outcome, and you continue. But for less experienced players, or for players whose social skills are at a significant disconnect with their characters' social skills, it helps to have some rules to handle the resolution of roleplay. That tests the *character's* skills, not the player's. In a "modular" rules approach, I'd make RP resolution optional ("basic"), so you can do without, but provide a resolution mechanic (like the current Diplomacy, Bluff or other Charisma checks) for when you want granular resolution ("Advanced"). I prefer to DM a mixed approach, myself. If the player says "I use diplomacy", they have to roleplay it out. But no matter how well or poorly the *player* RPs the situation, the *in character* outcome is determined by the die roll (though with a potential +/-2 modifier for my assessment of good/bad RP contribution). So the buffoon player playing the suave character isn't handicapped, and the suave player playing the buffoon character comes off that way as well. And sometimes the dice hate you and you put your foot in your mouth. Add puzzle solving, while we're at it. It's a historical part of D&D, though admittedly one that is very difficult to pull off well. In fact, I'd submit that a good puzzle is the hardest thing for a DM to pull off, as you need to simultaneously provide a challenge that is both appropriate for the players as well as their characters. [/QUOTE]

Verification