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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MostlyHarmless42" data-source="post: 9777826" data-attributes="member: 6845520">As I said before. What skills are "best" changes wildly on the game your are playing. I don't generally like the concept of saying someone is "a bad DM" or "playing the game wrong", but in the cases listed for DMs ruling Intimidation checks that way? Yes. They are playing the game wrong and (unless they are new and just do not yet know the rules of the game) those are bad DMS. You should not be playing at their tables because odds are strong that (again unless they are new), being unyielding and draconian about the uses for specific skills is not their only issue as a DM.Just as Persuasion is not mind control, Intimidate is not the "I want to start combat and make enemies" skill. And honestly? That's a skill that BG3 handles quite well. I'm not saying there can't be consequences to Intimidate (just as their should be to Persuasion), but there are often times where using either skill should be applicable, or even better than the other. I.e. in a situation where you are trying to convince someone who heavily values strength over words, there is a solid argument that Intimidation should be perfectly applicable to avoid escalating to a fight. There's even an argument to be made that even if you do succeed with a Persuasion check to avoid a fight with that same person, they might still come away from the situation thinking your character is a weakling and lose respect for your character. Skills are not iron clad in their application. That is literally the point of the dungeonmaster, to interpret skill difficulties and uses on the fly mid session alongside describing the world and relaying the consequences of the players' choices and actions.In relation to the Performance skill in general, our group uses it quite frequently. We've a bard or some other sort of entertainer or character that has proficiency in musical instruments in pretty much every game we've ran. We use Performance primarily as a means of allowing those characters to made side money, or as a form of distraction away from other party shenanigans. Getting into admittedly potentally house-rules territory here, but most of our tables also often use Performance in situations where a Deception, Persuasion, Sleight of Hand, or Stealth might not quite fit right. Examples off the top of my head include such things as making a rousing speech to a group of people (i.e. the pep talk before a battle); running a prolonged magical show that isn't just one simple card trick or flick of the wrist; a check to keep your character's social mask/facade together if they are experiencing a strong emotion in a place where it isn't appropriate or they do not wish to show it; to dance either alone or with a partner; or to attempt to blend into the scenery unnoticed by acting as if they belong there rather pretend to be a specific person.I realize some of these could also be rationalized as Deception, Persausion, Slight of Hand, or Stealth checks, but this also brings up another point. I am frequently allowing the players either the choice of two skill checks to pick from if I feel more than one is applicable, or having them use alternative ability scores with different skills (or allowing them the choice between two), such as using either Charisma OR Dexterity for Performance to dance.Semi-related...I completely agree on Strength not being applicable for most characters in most situations. I could, however, see an argument that in a single instance they might be able to use strength to convincingly move or hide behind a large object, or possibly attempt to convey that they are hiding by posing as some sort of strength based worker (like a mason or laborer). Stealth is not always about being unseen, and is often more about not standing out. I will, however, say that I'd be just as likely to allow a Charisma Stealth or Charisma Performance to allow one to do the latter 'posing as a worker' option. Hell, I can also see the argument that one could use Intelligence for stealth checks in some situations in the form of possibly being able to better analyze more efficient routes/suitable places to hide and follow someone.Now if we are referring to the 2024 barbarian using Strength for Stealth using the Primal Knowledge feature? I think you're missing the entire point of the purpose of that feature. It's not that Grog is hiding better by flexing his muscles and angrily shouting "You no see Grog!", it's that Grog is so infused with primal magical energy his raw strength allows him to channel it into being better at hiding or stalking prey like a predator. Like it or not the DnD ruleset assumes that magic is VERY prevalent in the world. It is infused into everyone, martial, spellcaster, or not. If you do not like this? Play a different game system. There are quite a few less magical alternatives.Going down the "It's not realistic" rabbithole is largely not a good idea anyway. It's also not normal for someone to have skin thick enough to stop a sword blow (Unarmored Defense), to be able to be supernaturally good at dodging things via spider sense (Danger Sense), to be so angry you do not die (Relentless Rage), to gain animal abilities by wearing trinkets/totems or adopting a fursonna (Wildheart Barbarian), or to summon vines to grab and teleport people (World Tree Barbarian) with either, but we all view those things as "acceptable" enough be a part of the fantasy of playing a shirtless person wrestling dragons and splitting peoples' heads in with a greataxe.</blockquote>

Verification