Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8006883" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is a fair analogy.This is not going to permit dynamic social interaction. And it means that PC build choices around CHA and the like become reduced in signficance.In the passage from The Two Towers that I referred to, Gimili does insult Eomer: &quot;You speak evil of that which is fair beyond the reach of your though, and only little wit can excuse you.&quot; When Eomer gets angry and threatens GImli, Legolas draws his bow and nocks an arrow &quot;with hands that moved quicker than sight&quot; and replies &quot;You would die before your stroke fell.&quot;Yet at the end of the scene Eomer lets the three go, contrary to a direct order he is under to detain them, and he lends them horses.If a GM follows the approach to adjudication that you advocate, I don't see how such a sequence would ever be possible. Likewise if players follows your prescriptions.This is still NPC as puzzle. With a pre-determined &quot;right response&quot; which the player are expected to infer from the GM's clues.In my view this will only ever produce shallow social encounters, with no sense of depth to the characters and no sense of human reality in the events that unfold.When Legolas, Gimil and Aragorn meet Eomer and his riders it is not a puzzle to be solved. It is a situation to be engaged. JRRT gives us one account of how it unfolded. Obviously we can imagine other possibilities. At a minimum, a FRPG social resolution system should be capable of emulating this sort of thing - the encounter of the heroes with a noble person who is torn between doing the right thing and loyalty to a misguided lord.And D&amp;D has actually had that resolution technology, even if it has subsequently laid it aside. It shouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility for 5e to handle this in some fashion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8006883, member: 42582"] This is a fair analogy. This is not going to permit dynamic social interaction. And it means that PC build choices around CHA and the like become reduced in signficance. In the passage from The Two Towers that I referred to, Gimili [I]does [/I]insult Eomer: "You speak evil of that which is fair beyond the reach of your though, and only little wit can excuse you." When Eomer gets angry and threatens GImli, Legolas draws his bow and nocks an arrow "with hands that moved quicker than sight" and replies "You would die before your stroke fell." Yet at the end of the scene Eomer lets the three go, contrary to a direct order he is under to detain them, and he lends them horses. If a GM follows the approach to adjudication that you advocate, I don't see how such a sequence would ever be possible. Likewise if players follows your prescriptions. This is still [I]NPC as puzzle[/I]. With a pre-determined "right response" which the player are expected to infer from the GM's clues. In my view this will only ever produce shallow social encounters, with no sense of depth to the characters and no sense of human reality in the events that unfold. When Legolas, Gimil and Aragorn meet Eomer and his riders it is not a puzzle to be solved. It is a situation to be engaged. JRRT gives us one account of how it unfolded. Obviously we can imagine other possibilities. At a minimum, a FRPG social resolution system should be capable of emulating this sort of thing - the encounter of the heroes with a noble person who is torn between doing the right thing and loyalty to a misguided lord. And D&D has actually had that resolution technology, even if it has subsequently laid it aside. It shouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility for 5e to handle this in some fashion. [/QUOTE]

Verification