Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6074809" data-attributes="member: 6681948">So, will you similarly give a +10 bonus to -10 penalty to players for their ability to role play - describe and act out - their combat actions?  A wallflower player who pumps character attributes into charisma and skill points into interaction skills should be able to play a suave, persuasive character, despite the player lacking these skills.  The same way the guy flopped in the armchair munching junk food and guzzling sugar water, who can't make it up the basement steps in one go and needs a rest in the middle, wheezing all the way, is allowed to pump his character's STR and DEX and play a dashing warrior who tumbles from point to point on the battlefield while lugging 75 pounds of gear.If the persuasive charasmatic character will be penalized unless the player demonstrates a reasonable facsimile of that persuasiveness and charisma, then Tubby there needs to show us a decent simulation of the shoulder roll from which he springs up deftly thrusting a 2 foot blade into his opponent, while carrying three cinder blocks in a backback and two more strapped to his thighs.It also penalizes players running characters whose strengths differ from their own.  I won't allow the chemist to "discover" gunpowder, nor the physicist to cobble together a nuke, in the game.  Why would I penalize the wallflower trying to play James Bond, or the 98 pound weakling playing a hulking brute?  And why would I give a +10 bonus to the good talker whose character is socially inept with an 8 CHA and no ranks in diplomacy, and let him be better at those skills than a shy, stuttering player whose character has a 16 CHA and 12 ranks invested in Diplomacy?Then tell the players up front that no character should buy ranks in interaction skills, because success or failure will be determined based on player ability, not character ability.Sorry if the above comes across as harsh.  This tends to be a hot button issue for me.  I am boggled by how many gamers will decry metagaming in all its forms, but will cheerfully base success in social interactions on the abilities of the player as much, even more, or ignoring entirely, the ability of the character.  In-game bonuses (like discovering this guy likes fine wine and giving him a gift, or showing the Duke persuasive evidence that the Lord-Mayor is plotting against him), sure.  Bonuses for the skills and abilities of the player?  Nope – you want to have a 16 CHA and 7 ranks of diplomacy in the game, your character, not the player, needs those abilities.  The martial arts enthusiast sitting next to you didn’t get 5 free monk levels either. As to the original problem, either roll with it and use one of the in-game solutions presented, or talk to your players about how you thought the encounter should have gone as the group is clearly not on the same page. “Changing another’s attitude” normally requires one minute (10 rounds).  But if the guy who opened the door was, at worst, indifferent, I’d allow that he would generally listen to a one minute request, so there’s time to use diplomacy.  If he’s unfriendly or hostile, I might require an immediate diplomacy check to determine whether he will listen long enough for you to have a chance, but clearly the skill can change even those attitudes or they would not have DC’s.</blockquote>

Verification