D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Thomas Shey]

True. It's an unfortunate fact of life that so many people are mid.

I was once asked by a friend (we'll call him ... Chad) what game he should run. Well, I knew Chad's level of aptitude. So I knew exactly what he should run.

View attachment 412083

Hey- nothing wrong with a little Moldvay, amirite?

Well, I think I've said before that "mid" has assumed sufficient negative context for it to actually be a bad choice to describe "middle of the road" anymore, but I think I've had my shot at suggesting people's terms are bad for one day.

(Of course arguably most people are fairly middle of the road in things they do. Depending on how you define "good" and "bad").

 

[AlViking]

Well, the point i was leading to is that the question is really only moot in a game like D&D as written, that only has simple success/fail mechanics.

In games with other mechanics, the failed attempt can have other impacts, so the choice of whether to allow the attempt can matter.

Like, in a fail-forward game, a last ditch effort to seduce the dragon, even if doomed to failure, may give you a way forward without getting eaten...

This is a D&D forum so unless you're clear that you're discussing a different game I'm going to assume D&D.

I was responding to:

Any and every action the GM doesn't like, regardless of reason, can and will get a "no". Doesn't matter what the action is.

I was making a joke (and a point) based on what I thought was a very common meme that there might be some situations why a GM wouldn't allow for a roll. There are very few cases where I would say no to a persuasion check, that's one of those situations where even it's not possible to succeed because the person you're trying to persuade is corrupted, dominated or an evil doppelganger I'd still allow for a roll. On the other hand if I know it's not goin to work, that kind of feels like I'm giving the player unfair expectation of possible success.

Meanwhile if the character should know for some reason that there's no way for the persuasion attempt to work then no I would tell them that they know full well it's not going to work. The character and player should know that in a typical FR campaign trying to convince Orcus to give up that whole Prince of Undeath gig is never going to happen.

If the characters are in the middle of a life-and-death fight with an evil dragon and the bard tries to seduce it would just be so out of context of the game that I would not take it seriously because it would be silly. I don't want silly in the middle of an epic fight in my game. Oh, and yes, I'm talking about my D&D game.

 

[AlViking]

That’s some sweet passive aggression.

It's passive aggressive to say there is no one true way?

 

[Lanefan]

This is a new variation on that argument, but it's not ultimately any different in practice. I cannot "make" new GMs. (Which is to say nothing of my moral objections to the very concept!) Running a game does not create new GMs.

Experience tells me I have to disagree on this one.

I became a DM because I was in a game, saw how it was done, and decided to try my hand. Another player from that same game, ditto., a year later; and both of us are still DMing today. Two other players also from that same game tried DMing and found it wasn't for them; while yet another tried it and while he thought he was doing OK the players quickly lost interest - he just couldn't say "no" to us and, us not exactly being the self-limiting types, we broke the game (though I got a great character out of it!).

It's almost a tree pattern, where one branch grows from another.

Presuming that every player is truly a budding GM just waiting for the right mentor to shape them into precisely the kind of GM I want to see is silly at the very best. At worst, it has some very morally-questionable implications.

Every player is a potential DM. The odds of any one player being exactly the DM you want to play under, however, are quite low indeed.

I'm not sure why this would be the least bit morally objectionable, though. The idea of people learning by example from mentors is as old as time.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It's passive aggressive to say there is no one true way?

No, its passive-aggression to say you can do what you want in a way that drops a big judgment on what you're doing.

People may not like to hear this, but semantic loading matters.

 

[AlViking]

No, its passive-aggression to say you can do what you want in a way that drops a big judgment on what you're doing.

People may not like to hear this, but semantic loading matters.

Seems to me that people are looking for excuses to take offense.

 

[Umbran]

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by bards, starving hysterical naked ...

It isn't clear if "starving hysterical naked" is supposed to apply to the best minds of your generation, or the bards...

 

[Thomas Shey]

Experience tells me I have to disagree on this one.

I became a DM because I was in a game, saw how it was done, and decided to try my hand. Another player from that same game, ditto., a year later; and both of us are still DMing today. Two other players also from that same game tried DMing and found it wasn't for them; while yet another tried it and while he thought he was doing OK the players quickly lost interest - he just couldn't say "no" to us and, us not exactly being the self-limiting types, we broke the game (though I got a great character out of it!).

This is one I have to have a leg in each camp.

On one hand, some people find the process of running games fascinating, take to it like ducks to water, and never look back; the first game I ever ran was the third I was ever involved in, and have GMed more often than not (probably a lot more often) ever since.

On the other hand, its abundantly clear some people have absolutely have no interest in doing that even though they're big fans of the hobby, or try it and decide for any number of reasons its not for them.

How do the numbers land on that? Good question. Unlike some things I don't feel particularly qualified to say, but I'll note the history of the hobby suggests people who take to it are not in the majority.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Seems to me that people are looking for excuses to take offense.

Seems to me that's always the excuse used to blow off people who are rightly taking offense.

 

[Faolyn]

Not all love or seduction is sexual, folks.

While this is true--I'm aroace, after all--the question obviously was about a very stereotypical bard.