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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7299926" data-attributes="member: 6880599">As a GM. I don't have a problem with players calling rolls for skills it encourages them to be active in the world and not wait for the GM to lay everything out for them as the game is a partnership, not GM story telling time. Also using your own example of " in their best interests", what if you judge the approach as an automatic failure? At that point it is in the players interest to role or if I agree with the skill and they have it and they role bad, I may ignore the role and let them auto succeed anyway. If you as a GM don't like the skill they used make it an automatic failure even on a 20 and have them re-roll the skill you want. This means there rolls are only suggestions and a buy in to the check. I would only let the players who rolled do the check and if I changed it from the skill they were "leading" me to it might not be good for them. Just because they have a skill and use it doesn't mean it applies or has an effect. If they do have the skills, it applies, and I was going to use it they are just speeding up the game. No problem there.As I player I see why this happens, My GM does not call for roles ALOT. He simple listens to players descriptions and auto fails/passes them. This is annoying if you have invested a lot into skills as part of your character. It trivializes or nullifies those player choices. Also, I am not charismatic but I am playing a charismatic player to attempt to improve my roleplaying by pushing a personal weakness as a result of not rolling the GM has made my character socially awkward even and unconvincing because my argument is not well said. Rolling gives my character a chance. Now my GM hates that too but if I don't ask for a role or role I will not get one for checks almost ever. The roleplay part of the game is a separation from reality. This means when a player tries to look for something its not the players ability to describe where they look but the characters. Having your player shutdown can be really demeaning of player choices.Because the GM control is still there it does no harm and is really more of hit "I want to try this in character". This topic is basically the result of the GM taking dice roles as law and/or GMs wanting all story and roleplay to be their idea which is a form of railroading players. All GROUP roleplaying games work better if players feel free to role play THEIR CHARACTERS. The cited article points to bais which the GM can choose to ignore, Framing "Players don't frame the die roll stakes -- you do." which GMs still do even if players roll, "The Inevitable Success Shuffle" which is easily fixed by denying additional rolls unless they called it to begin with, Too many rolls is not an issue if they as long as they are quick and relevant (meaning if your scout/rouge in the front is rolling perception to look out for traps, I would ignore your wizards rolls in the back since they would trigger before he sees them, eventually the player will stop calling them after being told the rogue sets them off just before he sees it since the wizard it in the back), Perverse Incentive is solved buy expecting players to say what they are doing but the GM tracking passive skills, if a players roll use the role, if they don't use the passive. A lot of GMs don't us passives and required rolls for everything in which case they need to call it. Ultimately, all the issues with players rolling can be fixed by the GMs approach.</blockquote>

Verification