Roleplaying How Do You Do It?

[Fallen Seraph]

There has been lots of talk on the WoTC General board about what is/isn't roleplaying and such. I posted a thread to gather background information of what each person does when they roleplay. I figured could be something of interest on ENWorld for simply just general discussion.

Post how they roleplay in their preferred edition. To further emphasize how much mechanics are used, I suggest having mechanics be in dark red to have them stand out.

Now obviously there is various situations that involve roleplaying. Either socially or non-combat wise. As such I will list a couple suggestions for people to type up to showcase their method (if you have suggestions feel free to say and will add to the list):

1) Diplomacy/Social Interaction.
2) A chase or other physical contest.
3) A task that would fall under the old 3.5 terminology as "Profession", "Craft" or "Perform".
4) Investigation or Puzzle Solving.

Please keep any editions wars (on either side!) out of the thread. This is more to help in giving a sense of background for the posts on the other threads.

Now for myself to answer these questions:

My preferred edition is 4e.

1) Diplomacy/Social Interaction.

Diplomacy begins with ordinary non-rule based roleplaying. With the player (speaking through his character) to an NPC (voiced by the DM). It continues like normal till it reaches the point where some wish to alter the circumstances begin, such as, "wooing the person", "agreeing to something", "lowering the price of something", etc. Your basic tenants of a diplomatic challenge.

This is where mechanics begin, while the player continues the discussion like normal a Skill Challenge begins. After a bout of conversation the player rolls a dice of their choosing, for example Insight. Upon a Insight roll the DM will give information or misinformation (depending on success) or failure that the character would notice. Such as, "you notice he is beginning to sweat", or "you notice nervousness in his voice", if the player wishes to act on this information it may help or hinder his cause. This Skill Challenge has no "failure limit" but does have a limit on the number of tries. This is determined by the DM to determine how long the conversation could last, ie; 10 Skill Challenge Attempts could constitute a carriage ride length of time. At the end it is still up to the Player to get the final result but the Skill Challenges can dramatically help or hinder.

If the DM wishes as well, he can go about doing his own Skill Challenge to do such things as determining the resolve of the person being talked too. Or being bolstered by others around him, this will directly effect how the NPC reacts/acts out toward the PC.

2) A chase or other physical contest.

This is a much more heavily mechanics based example then diplomacy. The example I will use is of a chase scene. While the chase is narrated jointly by the DM and the Players these narrations are influenced by the various Skill Challenges going on.

Each player rolls his own Skill Challenge using whichever Skill he feels is appropriate. At the sametime the DM is rolling his own Skill Challenge representing the NPC running away. Whoever manages to reach the "success" limit first either catches up or manages to run away. At the same time, a PC/NPC can forefeit their own Skill Challenge to give a bonus/or negative to another for their next roll. The amount either above or below the success determines how much of a bonus/negative.

3) A task that would fall under the old 3.5 terminology as "Profession", "Craft" or "Perfume".

The task I will showcase will be a person trying to construct a weapon. This is a almost entirely mechanics based situation. The Skills used in this are influenced by the type of weapon wished to be made. In this case lets make a magically-enchanted sword.

Once the resources are gathered to make the weapon, such as iron, a blacksmith forge, whatever magical property may be needed in that campaign world, etc. The work begins. The player goes through the process of making the weapon using the appropriate skills:
-Forging: Perception (one needs to be able to see changes in the metal)
-Hammering: Athletics (one needs the proper strength to shape the metal)
-Effort Involved: Endurance (it takes time and effort to forge a weapon)
-Knowledge Gained From: Religion, Arcana, History (the source one learnt to forge a weapon)
-Enchanting: Arcana (to know the method to enchant the weapon)

The level of difficulty involved depends on how powerful of a weapon is being crafted. This is a difficult Skill Challenge in general because there is no second-chances each Skill used must succeed. This gives it a slightly more realistic bent too it given how difficult it could be to forge weapons.

4) Investigation or Puzzle Solving.

The investigation example follows very closely to the model laid out in Diplomacy. It involves lots of player skill which is helped or hindered by the mechanics of the Skill Challenge resulting from the level of skill of the character.

The player goes about investigating the scene, item, body, etc. Per normal, asking what he sees, discussing with NPCs and other players ideas and such. Your general brainstorming. However the mechanics come in the form of Skill Challenges that gives clues (either correct or false) when investigating something. So they can be things such as, "the blood splatter suggests a blunt object was used", or "the foot prints are too small for an adult human", such things. The success of failure of a Skill Challenge determines whether or not a "eureka!" happens, essentially a very large clue if you succeed. Obviously if the players figure out things before the end of a Skill Challenge it doesn't happen. A Skill Challenge can happen again if they still wish to investigate more.

Oh and forgot to mention Skill Challenge difficulty for each of these:
1 and 4: Follow the same pattern, the higher you wish to try the better the clue/information you can gain.
2: The higher the difficulty the higher the bonus on your next try, +2 and +5 respectively. Aiding another is only the medium difficulty.
3: With crafting in this case, you determine in the beginning which to use for all. A low means the + bonus to the weapon is one lower, medium is normal and high is a extra + bonus to the weapon.

Well I hope everyone posts their answers, and is respectful, etc. If you have questions about another persons method feel free to ask. But only to try and understand it better.

 

[Asmor]

3) A task that would fall under the old 3.5 terminology as "Profession", "Craft" or "Perfume".

(emphasis mine)

(quoted for posterity )

 

[Fallen Seraph]

(emphasis mine)

(quoted for posterity )

Lol, edited. Obviously listening to the tv in the distance while a perfume add is playing and typing isn't good with typing in the right words Though hey perfume could give you a bonus to a Perform task

 

[jage]

I don't have much to add, because good roleplaying continues to elude me. Of course I like to think it's <i>them</i> not me... However I would like to suggest a new category for discussion:

5) Mundane- purchasing items or supplies/travelling in general (not lost, nor pursued, but making decisions about where to go along the way)

 

[Hella_Tellah]

My preferred game systems are Mage: The Awakening, Spirit of the Century, Nobilis, and Victoriana, but my methods can be used with any system, or no system. I'm a died-in-the-wool narrativist, so the following may make you RAGE if you prefer simulationist or gamist play.

First, come to the table with the assumption that, no matter what choices the players make, the outcome will be fun and interesting. This keeps players from feeling like they always have to make the best choices, or that they need to fall back on using their stats for everything to avoid missing out on the fun.

Second, evaluate player decisions on the basis of what would be the coolest, or make the most sense from a story perspective. Let's say we're playing a light-hearted game set in the Old West. If an NPC comes up to the famous gunslinger PC and insults his mama, it makes sense that the PC should be able to sock the NPC across the jaw, start a bar brawl, and make it out without serious physical or legal repercussions. It's just a genre thing, and it's the most fun way to interpret the player's idea.

Third, only ask for a roll of the dice when the outcome is uncertain and would be interesting no matter how the numbers play out. If Big Jim Hardy is driving his wagon from one settlement to the next, there's no need to roll Horsemanship--unless there's an equally interesting story to be had by him getting lost in the wilderness, having to swap out a wagon wheel, and so forth. If the wagon is speeding along a narrow ravine, being chased by Apaches, don't roll the driver's Horsemanship trait unless you know you can come up with a cool story whether he fails or succeeds. If you can't think of a way to make success and failure both different and fun, maybe just have rolls for shooting back at the Apaches, and don't worry about the wagon so much. If the player is trying to repair his pistol, for heaven's sake don't make him roll for it unless a broken pistol can somehow add to the story--maybe he has to learn how to fight like an Indian and use the spear and tomahawk he just found.

For diplomacy, bluffing, and other applications of "talk until the story progresses," drop a bunch of clues as to the style of interaction you want to run. Make it reasonably clear to the players what kind of approach will lead to good times. Abe Bertelman, the barkeep, talks in fancy, flowery, Ivy-league English, so the players will usually respond in kind. Edith the prostitute flirts her way through life, so she respects a good flirt. But if the players respond in any way that is interesting and fun, reward it with an easy roll. If their idea wasn't fun, the roll might be more difficult, but succeed or fail, something interesting happens.

Investigation calls for an even stricter application of the "rule of cool." It is not fun to have everyone sitting about, wondering what to do. Give out clues. Give out too many clues. If they succeed at something, give them a good clue, and if they fail, give them a different clue. If the old country preacher rolls to see if he knows that the corpse has been scalped, and fails, then give him some other clue: "Reverend Smith puzzles over the trader's body for a few moments, but can't quite put together just what killed the man. He does, however, see a set of hoofprints going off in the direction of Cheyenne." Now Reverend Smith doesn't know who killed his pardner, but he knows where to find them. Failure was meaningful, but not game-stopping.

tl;dr: Do what makes the story interesting, reward players who make the story interesting, and don't pick up the dice unless you can guarantee that the story will be interesting either way.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

1) Diplomacy/Social Interaction.
2) A chase or other physical contest.
3) A task that would fall under the old 3.5 terminology as "Profession", "Craft" or "Perform".
4) Investigation or Puzzle Solving.

For me, its all about the character. I try to get inside his head and act as he would. Sometimes, it leads me to take- or refuse to take- actions that may not have been what the DM intended.

Example: I was playing a Githzerai Monk with Dex24 and a Wis of 19 or 20. A (dex based) sporting challenge was placed in front of the party that he could have performed with only minimal risk to himself, but with a potentially devastating downside. Given the nature of the challenge and the DM in question, I'm pretty sure that he designed it with my PC's physical capabilities in mind.

While clearly the most qualified person in the party to succeed at the challenge, he wasn't the right person for the challenge- it was "unwise" and a bit beneath his dignity as a monk, in his opinion. Instead, the party barbarian took the challenge, and just barely succeeded.

Did it change the outcome of the campaign? Perhaps, and for the better. Instead of the cool tempered Monk smoking the local pros at their own game- possibly creating resentment- the Barbarian went in cocky and came out cocky but bruised, making a lot of friends.

In cases like investigations, I take a different tack (as player and GM). Since the game is about PC capabilities and not player capabilities, I have less problem with table talk & suggestions about how to run a PC. After all, an "investigator" type personality is likely to be the smartest person in the party (barring the "curious cat" types), and typically, they have intellects far and away beyond what most people have at their command. So letting the game group as a whole act as the PC's brain for purposes of solving a mystery is entirely appropriate.

(If I'm playing an idiot, I make it clear when I'm speaking as my PC and when I'm trying to help the genius PC live up to his potential.)

 

[The Green Adam]

I agree that it's all about the character; who are they, how do they think and why? What is their driving force or inspiration? What are their goals?

1) Diplomacy/Social Interaction.

Rolling for this type of thing makes no sense to me unless there is the possibility of 'chance' thrown in. That is to say, after talking in character to the NPC (GM), said NPC can't 'make up his/her mind'. Yes I have swayed him/her with a logical and compelling argument but doing what I say violates a pact or blood oath or something. Truly torn as to what to do, we rolls our respective skills and resistances with the higher score winning or whatever is game mechanics appropriate.

2) A chase or other physical contest.

My stats/skills vs. the enemy/NPC/other player with modifiers based on the description of unique and creative approaches to winning/escaping/etc.

3) A task that would fall under the old 3.5 terminology as "Profession", "Craft" or "Perform".

These must be described and as such, the cooler you make it sound the higher the bonuses to your roll.

4) Investigation or Puzzle Solving.

Whether or not you spot something or find something in a search is likely a search/perception roll unless the element is described in such a way as to stand out. The solving of a puzzle or mystery is achieved by paying attention to the GM and the story and rarely requires any sort of 'mechanic' unless you (the player) ask for a memory/knowledge check to recall a piece of the puzzle/plot you're unsure about.

As you can see I'm not much of a rules guy. I like that they're there so that I know if Billy got me when he said 'BANG' and said he got me and I said 'No you missed'. With rules I know if he missed or not. Rolling dice for social interactions is like flipping a coin to decide if you should pee or eat.

AD

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I am glad getting different views methods (was what I was hoping to see)

 

[WayneLigon]

I like for there to be hard and fast rules about a lot of things, so we can ignore them when they get in the way

In the situations given, I'd usually do the following:

1. Diplomacy. Appraise or Diplomacy for large sell-offs of loot. Usually it's not something we worry too much about or roleplay out, but I do pay attention to how the bargaining goes and what they unload on the usual series of merchants. Later on, those can become hooks for RP. If they have used the same merchant for many things and brought him some good deals, he'll give them a discount on purchases later on.

For other uses, I look at their roll, and also their skill ranks. That modifies the reaction somewhat, as does their relative position in society, how they're dressed, their demeanor, etc, etc. After a time, reputation plays a big role as well.

2. A chase. Usually it's just several oppossed rolls but circumstances and ideas from the players will modify things. They come up with a good enough plan, or have a real surprise for the pursuers, I might not even bother rolling.

3. Crafting. I can't say I've ever had a PC actually craft anything. They always pay someone to do it.

4. Investigation. This is another case where I create this kind of synergy between what their stats and rolls are like, and what the DCs of the various sections are like. It depends a lot on training, resources, etc; in a recent Eberron game, one woman had such an optimized character for such endeavors (she'd been trained by Viktor St Demaine himself), that it really was a matter of WHEN she'd find out something, rather than IF.

For puzzle solving, that's somewhat more lax. I hate most puzzles I've seen in games with a heated passion. To me, a puzzle that is not part of the game world is not a fair puzzle, but then I almost wholly rely on the character's stats, knowledges and backgrounds to determine how soon they get hints, or figure out the puzzle.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

When I say I try to get inside a PC's head, my exact path is determined by a lot of things, including the starting point.

For instance, over the course of a few campaigns, I noticed that I had been playing PCs with nearly identical weapon and equipment choices. Now, that was sometimes cliche, but for other PCs, it was quite different- few arcane casters wield longswords.

So, to get out of that rut, the next new campaign I joined, I vowed to use anything but a longsword. I looked at the list of weapons and chose a Maul. I hadn't even rolled my stats. After that step, I had to think about what kind of guy chooses a Maul as his primary weapon- not just what his battle tactics are, but also what kind of reaction he is expecting in non-combat situations. He's hauling around a huge freakin' hammer, for goodness sake! Do you really want to look like a nail to him?

Once I started answering those questions (and many more), I had a general life philosophy and attitude for the PC. After that, all I had to do was strive for consistency.

Then I thought..."Him?" NO! "HER!" Suddenly, I was playing a female Paladin who grew up in a fishing village. But while beautiful as any girl a father could ask for, she also grew tall and strong- soon, too big for her father's small fishing boat.

Soon, she was apprenticed out to a mason, who used her strength and power to help him do demolition on his jobs. She swung a mallet all day for years.

When certain events in her life drove her to become a wandering warrior, she had to choose a weapon. While she could have chosen the sword (or scimitar or falchion, as befitted her culture), to do so would have violated laws about commoners carrying weapons. So she chose the Maul, an oversized, weaponized version of the tool she was so familar with (and as backup, an oversized fisherman's knife, a.k.a. a shortsword).