D&D 5E Roleplaying in D&D 5E: It’s How You Play the Game

[Maxperson]

Nope. 4e had very specific actions called "skill Powers". Some even had limited uses by short rest.

Fair enough. It just didn't appear that way from your post.

 

[Nefermandias]

Fair enough. It just didn't appear that way from your post.

Because I wasn't only talking about Skill Powers.
Let me give you another example: the Intimidate skill.

Back in 4e, you had the option to use your standard action to force a blooded enemy to surrender with an intimidate roll. This action could only be taken once per encounter.

 

[iserith]

4e may have been that way(I don't know as I didn't play it), but what you describe there isn't pushing a skill button. The action is, "I try to disable the magical effect." and then the DM calls for a skill check. The action is, " I try to detect any nearby magical auras." and the DM calls for a skill check.

D&D 4e was by comparison explicit about players asking to make skill checks (no quotes here because that term is a thing in D&D 4e but not 5e) and the DM advised to almost always say "yes" to the request. The rules also stated that checks would also determine success or failure and sometimes how well a thing was done (degrees of success). Certainly a skill check in this game represented something going on in the game world, but play was often mechanics first, fiction last, at least in my experience - in a sense an engine for inspiring fiction to be established through description. Still a good game that I played through its run and after, but notably different than D&D 5e.

 

[Nefermandias]

D&D 4e was by comparison explicit about players asking to make skill checks (no quotes here because that term is a thing in D&D 4e but not 5e) and the DM advised to almost always say "yes" to the request. The rules also stated that checks would also determine success or failure and sometimes how well a thing was done (degrees of success). Certainly a skill check in this game represented something going on in the game world, but play was often mechanics first, fiction last, at least in my experience - in a sense an engine for inspiring fiction to be established through description. Still a good game that I played through its run after after, but notably different than D&D 5e.

Precisely!

That's the core mechanics in which Skill Challenges relied upon. The player choses a Skill to roll (among a selection of available skills in that particular Challenge) then, player and DM work together to create the fiction based on that roll's result.

 

[Voadam]

Yes, remove players agency and you cannot call it roleplay anymore, no matter how you twist it.

When your character is mind-controlled you are no longer roleplaying?

That seems counter to a normal understanding of roleplaying.

 

[Nefermandias]

When your character is mind-controlled you are no longer roleplaying?

That seems counter to a normal understanding of roleplaying.

You are not role playing while your character is dead too. I don't see your point.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Because I wasn't only talking about Skill Powers.
Let me give you another example: the Intimidate skill.

Back in 4e, you had the option to use your standard action to force a blooded enemy to surrender with an intimidate roll. This action could only be taken once per encounter.

D&D 4e was by comparison explicit about players asking to make skill checks (no quotes here because that term is a thing in D&D 4e but not 5e) and the DM advised to almost always say "yes" to the request. The rules also stated that checks would also determine success or failure and sometimes how well a thing was done (degrees of success). Certainly a skill check in this game represented something going on in the game world, but play was often mechanics first, fiction last, at least in my experience - in a sense an engine for inspiring fiction to be established through description. Still a good game that I played through its run after after, but notably different than D&D 5e.

It's as if some folks have taken their knowledge of 4e (or 3e or...) and then started playing 5e using many of the same techniques. Because, let's be honest, reading all those pages of all those books was going to take way too long when all we wanted to do was dive in, create characters and scenarios, and play! Groups still had fun because, well, D&D.

My experience was slightly different than many here in that I never played 2e-4e, so I was really going in "fresh" after several decades away from the game. I got a bit befuddled - but went with the flow so as not to interrupt game play - when players would just roll a "skill check" or insisted that standing up provoked an opportunity attack or declared they were taking a 5' step. Only by scouring the books after such sessions did I realize they were importing old rules into the game and it was making things, frankly, clunky. Don't get me wrong, it was mostly fun but it was clear, as DM, I hadn't done nearly enough reading... and neither had the players. And only by listening to, and experimenting with, advice given freely here on ENWorld did I realize a way to play that made sense to me relative to the rules and, more importantly, was more satisfying and fun for our whole table. To be sure, I'm still learning after many years of DMing and playing 5e - and that is part of the fun for me, too.

 

[Voadam]

Roleplaying is, literally, the act of playing out a role.

Yes, remove players agency and you cannot call it roleplay anymore, no matter how you twist it.

You are not role playing while your character is dead too. I don't see your point.

Playing out a role that has had its agency taken away in some way still seems to be roleplaying.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I believe what they’re saying is that deciding how your character thinks, speaks, and acts is the only autonomy the rules explicitly grant players, everything else falling under the DM’s authority. They don’t state any conclusions based on this, so it’s just a factual statement about the rules, but at a guess I suspect they were suggesting that because this is the only power the players are explicitly granted by the rules, DMs shouldn’t take that away from them too.

What about Inspiration? It may be optional and perhaps not used a ton, but this is an explicit rule which provides for direct mechanical impact on the game state by the player. It is not much, but it does contradict the "and that is all that is allowed."

But I have to agree with @Oofta on this one, the OP is just wrong, assuming that's what he thought. Even if there's nothing else SPELLED OUT, no successful game remains for long such a limited exchange.

 

[Nefermandias]

Playing out a role that has had its agency taken away in some way still seems to be roleplaying.

Semantics. Hard pass. Have a good one.