Roll Playing & not just rolling dice

[Zappo]

I don't give bonuses for making a good speech when your character is making a good speech. Either the roleplaying is fun, in which case it's its own reward, or it isn't, in which case I won't force it on the player.

The roleplaying bonus XP I give are based on whether you are having your character doing the actions he would do. If you play a half orc barbarian minmaxed using Cha as a dump stat, and you want him to give a speech because you as a player are good at speeches, not only you aren't going to get away without rolling your -2 Diplomacy skill, but you're also looking at an XP penalty (unless the character is also stupid enough that he would attempt this).

 

[Mort]

Hey, look! It's another one of those idiotic arguments that tries to compare physical actions to mental/descriptive ones in a mental/descriptive game, and assumes that the DM doesn't know the preferred play style of his/her players! Wow! Whooda thunk we'd see another one of those?

Gee, if you'd actually bothered to read the very next sentence in my post you'd notice that the DM knowing his players is exactly what I was going for. But I suppose ad hominem attacks are so much more fun.

This has nothing to do with a DM knowing his players; it has to do with 'all else being equal' the mental and charisma stats should use the same rules as the physical ones. Changing that for mental or intrigue heavy games is great, and many people enjoy it - but you can't argue that the dynamics of the game are not changed.

 

[StalkingBlue]

I give bonuses for good description - that applies equally to climbing a rock face, bluffing a bugbear or orating a speech. I try to avoid penalties for poor description though, but if the PC is doing something idiotic it may be necessary. Also I dislike players who won't even attempt to get into character when conversing with an NPC, although this is rare.
For Diplomacy etc, I would not negate the result of the roll, but I would not treat it as a magic 'charm' effect no matter how good the roll or how persuasive the real-life speaker is. Generally speaking I let a player rely on the die roll & their Diplomacy (etc) ranks if they want, but they'll get bonuses for being real-life persuasive since that adds to the roleplay experience & enjoyment for everyone else including me!

Completely seconded. You know, it's scary how similar we think in some things? ...

Scary.

 

[StalkingBlue]

"Okay, well as you start speaking, the knights are looking pretty unsure. Heck is an ugly place (nearly as ugly as Hell) and they're tired, but you start, you know, really getting into, and you climb up on a ruined tower nearby to wave your flag -- "

And usually around there even the most socially inept player will jump in:

"Yeah! And I wave the flag and I start yelling, 'FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEEEDDOOOOMMMM!!!!' And we charge! Straight into Heck! Yeah!"

NOW we're having fun.

Word booty.

Wow.

Wish I could say I've been as successful as that in luring RP-shy players out, at least not instantly - best response I usually got was a secret glowing smile, which might even linger for a while. And I like to believe that I have managed to lure some people out of hiding over a period of time.

Then again I'm probably not your rousing-charismatic kind of GM. More your quiet sneaking type.


And of course it was Braveheart. Sheesh ...

 

[Mort]

Has anyone tried making the roll first and then roleplaying the result?

So if you get a roll of '2' you roleplay an akward bumbling negotion, if you get a '32' you roleplay the smoothest guy on the planet.

Seems like a fun twist that rewards the characters social skills and still lets the player shine.

Just a thought

 

[diaglo]

To me, roll playing is when the players settle their difference with baguette duels.

and the winner gets to eat the loser with butter and/or jam.

 

[StalkingBlue]

Has anyone tried making the roll first and then roleplaying the result?

So if you get a roll of '2' you roleplay an akward bumbling negotion, if you get a '32' you roleplay the smoothest guy on the planet.

Seems like a fun twist that rewards the characters social skills and still lets the player shine.

Just a thought

I'd say it lets players shine who are comfortable playing their character in various modes and shades. Definitely more difficult to do than just taking a deep breath and starting to RP a situation "just as yourself".

That type of thing can be fun if the entire group is on about the same comfort level with rp'ing situations - if not it penalises the RP-shy types because it (1) forces you to rp where before you might just have ducked your head and rolled, and (2) raises expectations of the kind of nuances you can convey through rp'ing your character.

 

[Aaron L]

Has anyone tried making the roll first and then roleplaying the result?

That's what we try to do. RP'ing a failed diplomacy roll can be dang fun.

 

[Henry]

Guys, let's play nicer towards one another. If we can role-play a moving St. Crispin's day speech, we can role-play being civil, too.

Has anyone tried making the roll first and then roleplaying the result?

I want to say that Mouseferatu was the first person to bring this up recently - anyway, this same discussion was going on about two weeks ago, and Mouse or another poster said this was their preferred tactic - let the roleplay emulate the result, instead of vice versa.

I encourage more active participation and give a +2 or +4 bonus based on it, but I still let the roll stand. I'm still not going to penalize players who are shy but want to play a charismatic devil. Conversely, I'm not going to let a PC with a 6 CHA and zero bluff or diplomacy to get off easily, either. That player had better start rolling those 20's fast!

 

[Mort]

I'd say it lets players shine who are comfortable playing their character in various modes and shades. Definitely more difficult to do than just taking a deep breath and starting to RP a situation "just as yourself".

That type of thing can be fun if the entire group is on about the same comfort level with rp'ing situations - if not it penalises the RP-shy types because it (1) forces you to rp where before you might just have ducked your head and rolled, and (2) raises expectations of the kind of nuances you can convey through rp'ing your character.

Absolutely, this would not be for everybody. I just get sick of people only going one way on ther charisma route.
If they are a better negotiator, have more charisma, etc. then their character they get the benefit. But they don't go the other way of deliberately sabotoging themselves because their character is not Mr. Orator.
If your going to tout the 'roleplaying flag' you need to roleplay the negatives as well.

Actually, this is not penalising the shy types at all though. The roll is the roll. In game terms, the shy guy has the same result as the great orator. This just lets the roleplayer really sink his teeth be it a good or bad result of the die without penalizing the shy guy.