Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mattachine" data-source="post: 5812095" data-attributes="member: 6678226">The second response worries me.I have never been comfortable with a game that purports significant roleplay and detailed characters and at the same time expects player metagaming to be an important factor in problem resolution. It is one of the reasons I was not happy with much of the "Gygaxian" style of play in early D&D.If characters have detailed stats and defined skills and powers, then the player should be able to roleplay those abilities, and make a die roll to determine success--especially when the player's relevant ability or knowledge is vastly different from the character's.If the rules explicitly call for adjudicating situations by player actions/statements (rather than character-based actions), I think that is step backwards. Anyone else here been in one of these situations over the years?a. My genius-level wizard is confronted with a simple logic puzzle, but I (the player) can't figure it out. b. I am playing a dumb-as-rocks warrior who can solve the logic puzzle because I (the player) am good at that sort of puzzle.c. I have a smooth-talking bard or thief who needs to get information from the local barman, but I (the player) can't quite think of the right words to say.There are games out there were these situations are explicitly based on player actions/statements, but these same systems don't heavily define character stats and abilities like D&D always has. I will be sad to see the game move in that direction.</blockquote>

Verification