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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 6078808">i thini this is a part of the game where, for many people, what your character actualy says is an important part of the experience and interaction with the setting. For some, rolling a die is just as good at determining the way the in game event plays out, but for others the way the in game even plays out is the end itself (and the die navigates around that). It is also tricky because both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. For me, it is just too important to speak in character and using rolls either in place or to determine what really happens (which kind of undermines in character role play) is less fun.there are some fairness issues of course, just likke there are fairness issues around any part of the game where players can use their smarts to overcome challenges. I think it is important to remember though that skills like diplomacy, bluff and intimidate, at least in D&D are somewhat new. Before third edition, charisma was used for the reaction roll for situations where the GM was unsure of how monsters or npcs might react, and it was usually applied at the beginning of a situation (then you would rp to change or improve the reaction). Skills like ettitquette were really knowledges. The player would use them to see if he knew the most appropriate way to behave but would still have to role play it out himself. Ultimately this boils down to what you are at the table for and what you enjoy. I love interacting with npcs, and I love investigations. I dont like reducing my interroations of interviews with suspects in an investigation to a die roll. I want a real one to one relationship to what I say and what the NPC says. And I dont want to use social skills as a character simulator (i.e. i got an 18 so now i play my guy suave, but When I get a 3 I bumble). To me I want to feel the direct connection to my character and dont want it mediated by dice. This approach does benefit people with better social skills no doubt (just like the grid benefits people with better tactical skills). I think to a degree there is a element of challenge and competition in the game that is okay to preserve. And natural talent can be rewarded. At the same time, I think you give people an A for effort as a GM (i dnt care if Jimmy can give a stellar speech, just that he try to give one....if he has a high chr, I can cut him a bit of slack and weigh that into the npcs reaction). Also, over time, when you play this, people do get better (just like people learn better tactics over time with minies).</blockquote>

Verification