NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6742829" data-attributes="member: 16814">I followed you until this (and, I'd like to say enjoyed the discussion, even if I wasn't in full agreement with you, I could follow your train of thought well enough).  That's not to say I don't understand what you're saying here, but that I was resolving the whole of the situation through a single skill check.  To be fully honest, I didn't even make a skill check for this because that particular player is very much involved in roleplaying and the first thing he said as I described him coming home to his father calling, "Miguel, I'm glad you're home, we have a guest!" was, "oh, $%#."  But I do have players at my table for whom I would have likely made a skill check during the ensuing conversation with the 'guest', depending on how the conversation went.But, even that honestly aside, I don't see any reduction involved in having social interactions modeled on skill usages, so long as you don't take complex, multifaceted situations and resolve them with a single skill check.  That seems more like your example, where nothing but a single attack roll decides the outcome of a fight, whereas I allow multiple attack rolls, with different strategies, and saving throws, to help direct a scene.Bottom line, to me, characters are game assets like any other.  They follow the same rules.  Anything a character can do, something else in the fictional world can do.  The wonder of the PCs is what they actually decide to do with that agency, that and the fact that the story at the table features them.  That skill checks can be used against PCs is, to me, not even an issue worth worrying about -- I don't see it as a loss of agency at all.Thanks, I've enjoyed it.</blockquote>

Verification