Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Persuade, Intimidate, and Deceive used vs. PCs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bawylie" data-source="post: 6727075" data-attributes="member: 6776133"><p>This is an interesting discussion. </p><p></p><p>I agree with the principle that players determine how their characters think, act, & feel. As such, I typically refrain from telling them what they think, how they act, or how they feel. Likewise, I tend to avoid using Deception checks, Intimidation Checks, Persuasion checks, etc., against the PCs unless in some kind of contested action. </p><p></p><p>And I tend to resolve PvP in the following way: When one player takes an action against another player, it is up to the recipient of that action to determine the result of the action. I do this because I feel PvP is a huge waste of time unless it's something the players are very interested in hashing out. This permits them to engage with it as much or as little as they wish. This is not a matter of "how the world works" it's a metagame concern over how I want my table to run and how much time I wish to spend on particular activities. </p><p></p><p>Now there are some exceptions to how I treat the thoughts, feelings, and actions of PCs. These exceptions happen when I'm framing a new scene or concluding one. </p><p></p><p>For instance, I like to use mood-setting words in my descriptions. (Spooky, disgusting, lovely, comforting, dreadful, etc, etc). While these don't really say "you do/must feel this way" they do set an expectation. I have no problem with this. </p><p></p><p>And also when concluding a scene, I have from time to time taken some amount of control over PC actions. For instance, "You spend the rest of the afternoon questioning the prisoner. After learning X Y & Z, it is clear you've gotten everything you can get out of him. You leave to meet up with everyone else at dinner and discuss your findings..." I have no problem with this either. </p><p></p><p>And again, the reason I DONT object to these (intrusions?) on player agency is because they're used in the service of moving along the game. Time is our currency, I don't want to be wasteful with it. And I generally won't permit it to be monopolized or spent by one player at the expense of other players. </p><p></p><p>That said, I don't tell the players how their characters feel or act or think during a scene or encounter. That strikes me as unfairly infringing on their bit of the game. And i "get" very little from it. </p><p></p><p>So for me, this isn't a black and white issue. But it's 45% black, 45% white, and 10% gray. And while I'll bend a little in the gray, I will try to do so with a fairly light touch or in the service of moving on to the next interesting and playable bit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bawylie, post: 6727075, member: 6776133"] This is an interesting discussion. I agree with the principle that players determine how their characters think, act, & feel. As such, I typically refrain from telling them what they think, how they act, or how they feel. Likewise, I tend to avoid using Deception checks, Intimidation Checks, Persuasion checks, etc., against the PCs unless in some kind of contested action. And I tend to resolve PvP in the following way: When one player takes an action against another player, it is up to the recipient of that action to determine the result of the action. I do this because I feel PvP is a huge waste of time unless it's something the players are very interested in hashing out. This permits them to engage with it as much or as little as they wish. This is not a matter of "how the world works" it's a metagame concern over how I want my table to run and how much time I wish to spend on particular activities. Now there are some exceptions to how I treat the thoughts, feelings, and actions of PCs. These exceptions happen when I'm framing a new scene or concluding one. For instance, I like to use mood-setting words in my descriptions. (Spooky, disgusting, lovely, comforting, dreadful, etc, etc). While these don't really say "you do/must feel this way" they do set an expectation. I have no problem with this. And also when concluding a scene, I have from time to time taken some amount of control over PC actions. For instance, "You spend the rest of the afternoon questioning the prisoner. After learning X Y & Z, it is clear you've gotten everything you can get out of him. You leave to meet up with everyone else at dinner and discuss your findings..." I have no problem with this either. And again, the reason I DONT object to these (intrusions?) on player agency is because they're used in the service of moving along the game. Time is our currency, I don't want to be wasteful with it. And I generally won't permit it to be monopolized or spent by one player at the expense of other players. That said, I don't tell the players how their characters feel or act or think during a scene or encounter. That strikes me as unfairly infringing on their bit of the game. And i "get" very little from it. So for me, this isn't a black and white issue. But it's 45% black, 45% white, and 10% gray. And while I'll bend a little in the gray, I will try to do so with a fairly light touch or in the service of moving on to the next interesting and playable bit. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Persuade, Intimidate, and Deceive used vs. PCs
Top