Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 7037866" data-source="post: 9446292">A lot like you describe in the post. Even when AD&D adopted non-weapon proficiencies, few could be used as substitutes for actual role-playing. It wasn't necessary to "speak in the funny voice" of your character or whatever (although it happened a lot!), but you had to speak as your character: what do they say? How to they react to what NPCs say?No, of course you had reaction rolls, but that was really the closest thing to a roll to replace any sort of role in the game.As you say, not necessarily better or worse--just different from the modern game. In some ways, the modern game makes more sense. You aren't there to see how an NPC acts or speaks, etc., so allowing a Wisdom (Insight) check to determine if your PC sees or senses something about the NPC works, and the DM can reveal those things that might feel off or wrong to the PC. Few DMs IME are good enough to role-play the NPCs in the game so the player can make those "insight" calls based on the DM's portrayal of the NPC.</blockquote>