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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9566510" data-attributes="member: 7025508">Firstly, I assumed that in the situation question both chracters are PCs. Like I've said many times I have no issue with using social skills against NPCs.No, I don't see a problem. It is like in real life. People discuss, perhaps an agreement is reached, perhaps not.It is not puzzle any more than real people with their values, goals and preferences are a puzzle.Right. Hence the previous method where the resolution is based on the personality of the participants and the points raised in the discussion is preferable.Perhaps there is nothing that could change the mind of Sir James. If it is so, then so be it.I mean yes, you should actually plant the personality, values and goals of your PC. That to me seems rather basic part of playing a roleplaying game.You were almost there! But then you stopped roleplaying and started of-gaming and brought rules into it. If it feels to you that the argument would convince your character, then it does. Phew! We did it!Yeah, this is not roleplaying, this is inventing some narrative around the outcome given by the dice after the fact.That's terrible though and defeats the whole point of playing the game in the first place. I would do this except perhaps for expediency for super trivial things like haggling with a merchant for a small sum. (But come think of it, we usually just roleplay that too.)Yes. That is what I want to do.I am glad that we have the three other options, as I don't want them to be used and I think their use is detrimental to the sort of gaming I want. Again, you do you; if you like it go for it. But the fact remains that in the case where the roll is used it removes the player's agency to make the decision. I am not sure why it so hard to admit that this is what is happening.</blockquote>

Verification