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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6239408" data-attributes="member: 6681948">All this is, to me, desirable.  The player can decide to incorporate in-game knowledge (for example, that the King is a history buff, that they have evidence of Orcish involvement, or bluffing to create an implication of Orcish involvement) to enhance their in-game chances for success.  Where I draw the line is granting bonuses because  Bob made a really great speech for his 8 CHA, no social skills character, especially when this ultimately results in smooth talking Bob getting equivalent results to Ted's 18 CHA character with 10 ranks in diplomacy simply because Bob is articulate and well spoken, and Ted is not.  Ted's character gets no advantages for the fact that Ted is a regular participant and winner of Iron Man competitions while Bob can't make it up the stairs from the basement without a break in the middle to catch his breath.  Bob's character should not get an advantage because Bob himself is a god orator, nor should it suffer a disadvantage because Bob is morbidly obese and in horrible physical shape.Agreed.   And when Bob's bonuses from his personal skills result in him being able to get results comparable to the character who devotes character resources to persuasiveness, then we may as well remove interaction skills from the game as well.  Again, I think the use of in-game resources should grant a bonus.  I don't think "Bob is a persuasive speaker" should translate to "Bob's character is a persuasive speaker" any more than an Olympic gymnast should have some advantage on his character's DEX or acrobatics skill.  Here again, wouldn't an experienced, well trained expert be better able to assess the best places to climb, and the most likely places to search for traps, just as a skilled swordsman is better able to assess the best time to strike to bypass his opponent's defenses?  If we have a paramedic in our group, should he get bonuses to the Healing skill for being able to specify exactly how one would stabilize a burn victim after the Red Dragon's attack?  If so, why should a player with a degree in chemistry not be able to have his character make drugs, poisons, etc. using his own skills?  The player and the character are, and should be, separate.  The player's skill at directing the abilities of his character will, and should, influence in-game success.  The player's ability to emulate a character's skills should not.When your "low WIS, impetuous, impulsive" character routinely takes a reasoned, methodical approach and patiently approaches problems in the best possible tactical manner, I'm not seeing a low WIS, impetuous, impulsive character in play.  Instead, I am seeing a playing piece in a boardgame, whose decisions are ruled entirely by the player's interpretation of the best possible tactical choices.  To me, at least, that is poor role playing.  The "Game" has overridden the "Role Playing" aspect.  If the only way I know your character has a sub-par CHA and no social skills is because you read it to me from your character sheet, I don't believe your character is well played.  Quite the reverse, if the impression from watching game play is that your character is a persuasive diplomat then I consider your role playing to be poor to nonexistent.</blockquote>

Verification