D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Micah Sweet]

OK. I didn't say forcing. But in not incentivising it, aren't you getting less of it?

A lot of people find speaking in character fun. I know I do. But as a DM I would never require it, or make a "face" character less effective because their player doesn't care for public speaking.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Wrong way round: it makes events at the table beholden to the fiction.

You are requiring that the events of the fiction align temporally with the events of play at the table.

The character is trying to persuade the Duke, and...

...in situations like this, ideally what you say at the table word-for-word mirrors what your character says in the fiction.

And how do you resolve such a scene? How is it determined if the duke is persuaded?

No, a sorcerer used a counterspell to interrupt the wizard's spell before he finished casting it. (and Crawford's SA ruling that a counterspell can itself be countered is the height of stupid in terms of sequentiality in time)

I don’t see how this contradicts what I said.

I don't think so.

Fair enough, but it certainly comes across that way.

 

[bloodtide]

If you're prioritizing immersive "acting as your character" roleplay, where the rules "get out of the way", where is the point where you need to start calling for a resolution check? And how much, if any, impact does the immersive roleplay have on the results of the check?

Any point that the gamers want too. Or any effect that is wanted.

If the player (immersed as his character) and the DM (playing the duke) have a ten-minute negotiation in character at the table, and the player does an excellent job, does that bypass the need for checks? Does it give a bonus? Or is a straight roll?

If your playing a Deep Immersive Role Play Acting style, yes. Depends on the style.

Are you more likely to bypass the check if the character has 16 Cha and Persuasion expertise? What if they only have 12 Cha and Persuasion proficiency?

Depends on the Style


Like say a player and DM are playing an RPG. The game has combat rules. The player has a halfling rogue with the abilities sneak, hide, open locks and backstab. So during the game play the halfing comes to a cave entrance guarded by a goblin. The player asks, can my halfling try and talk his way past the guard?

High Rules Style- The DM is quick to say NO. We are playing THIS RPG ONLY, so your character can only do Official Rule Actions with Official Game Mechanics (like a board game). So the player just goes "ok, I'll use sneak and try to backstab as that is all I can do."

Deep Immersive Role Play Acting Style- The DM is quick to say "sure you can try." The rulebook is closed and flicked off the table as they will officially not be playing with the rules for the next couple of minutes. The player puts on their best 'act' as a halfling fast talking rogue, while the DM acts as the goblin guard. The result here is left 100% to the DMs whim.

Rule Role Play Mixup- The DM (maybe with the player) creates some sort of on the fly homebrew rule(s) to cover whatever is needed. The player gives some lite acting in the role and describes what they do. The DM asks for a roll to see what happens. For example the DM calls for a Charisma check and gives the player a +2 for their acting and another +2 for the character prop of the 'necklace of halfling ears'. The dice somewhat determine what happens, with 100% left to the DMs whim.






.

 

[pemerton]

If you honestly can't understand the difference between a simulationist approach and the approach you're proposing I don't know what to say. The speech, or at least the contents therein, come from the player. The delivery comes from the character's inherent abilities and training as represented by ability scores and proficiency. It does not come from some external game token.

I really don't follow this. What is the difference, in this context, between a token and a die roll? The die roll "represents" how "well" the speech was delivered, and perhaps also how receptive the NPC it is direct to happens to be. The expenditure of the token "represents" the degree of genuine passion on the part of the speaker, and the extent to which that is successfully impressed upon the listener.

I don't see how one is "simulationist" and the other is not.

If the mechanics give you a token because you have a high Charisma, as an example, that it most certainly would be related to the character’s abilities.

It might not be your preference for mechanics, but your preferred “playstyle” is quite possible to achieve with dice less mechanics.

Right. Tokens per day equal to CHA bonus, or whatever, would be one way of linking the imagined token mechanic to the PC's abilities.

Even without such a linkage, I don't see that it would be very different from other parts of a PC's build that are not linked to stats - eg a Rogue's Cunning Action ability doesn't depend upon having any particular DEX score. So a Rogue with DEX 8 can perform cunning actions, while a Fighter with DEX 20 can't.

 

[Oofta]

I really don't follow this. What is the difference, in this context, between a token and a die roll? The die roll "represents" how "well" the speech was delivered, and perhaps also how receptive the NPC it is direct to happens to be. The expenditure of the token "represents" the degree of genuine passion on the part of the speaker, and the extent to which that is successfully impressed upon the listener.

I don't see how one is "simulationist" and the other is not.

Right. Tokens per day equal to CHA bonus, or whatever, would be one way of linking the imagined token mechanic to the PC's abilities.

Even without such a linkage, I don't see that it would be very different from other parts of a PC's build that are not linked to stats - eg a Rogue's Cunning Action ability doesn't depend upon having any particular DEX score. So a Rogue with DEX 8 can perform cunning actions, while a Fighter with DEX 20 can't.

A die roll is a randomizer for when something might work. It's that moment when you just happen to think of the right thing to say or after a conversation you think "Dangit, I should have remembered to bring up [some fact or tidbit that would have swayed the conversation]". It reflects that sometimes we're just on our game and other times we aren't.

We can't just decide that for this particular task we are going to succeed, but if we do we're less likely to succeed the next time. We have no tokens to spend in real life, I don't want them in the game I play either.

But like I said, if you don't get it, you don't get it.

 

[soviet]

A die roll is a randomizer for when something might work. It's that moment when you just happen to think of the right thing to say or after a conversation you think "Dangit, I should have remembered to bring up [some fact or tidbit that would have swayed the conversation]". It reflects that sometimes we're just on our game and other times we aren't.

We can't just decide that for this particular task we are going to succeed, but if we do we're less likely to succeed the next time. We have no tokens to spend in real life, I don't want them in the game I play either.

But like I said, if you don't get it, you don't get it.

So no taking 10, inspiration, 2014 background traits, Lucky feat, etc?

I respect the opposition to such mechanics, even if I don't share it. But they are baked in to 5e. You can take them out, of course, but they are in the printed books. They aren't something being injected into the game by third parties.

 

[Oofta]

So no taking 10, inspiration, 2014 background traits, Lucky feat, etc?

I respect the opposition to such mechanics, even if I don't share it. But they are baked in to 5e. You can take them out, of course, but they are in the printed books. They aren't something being injected into the game by third parties.

Did I say I liked every aspect of D&D? Because I don't remember saying that.

EDIT: taking 10 isn't a thing anymore (AFAIK), I thought it referenced the rogue cheese which I dislike as a feature. But taking 10 was just a shortcut for taking your time to search or similar. Lucky? That's a basically a supernatural ability.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So no taking 10, inspiration, 2014 background traits, Lucky feat, etc?

I respect the opposition to such mechanics, even if I don't share it. But they are baked in to 5e. You can take them out, of course, but they are in the printed books. They aren't something being injected into the game by third parties.

Not sure what relevance that fact has here, to be honest. How well or badly a rule works for you and yours has nothing to do with whether or not it's printed in the book.

 

[soviet]

Not sure what relevance that fact has here, to be honest. How well or badly a rule works for you and yours has nothing to do with whether or not it's printed in the book.

Oofta had said previously that this is a conversation about D&D, and D&D doesn't have such 'tokens'.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oofta had said previously that this is a conversation about D&D, and D&D doesn't have such 'tokens'.

Fair enough. Even inspiration and Lucky aren't "tokens". They increase the chances of success, but they don't guarantee it.