Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mattachine" data-source="post: 5812571" data-attributes="member: 6678226">Though I understand your reasoning, that would fall flat in my games. You, as a player, are smart--your characters shouldn't necessarily be idiot-savants. If you make low-int, low-wis characters, then why should they be the ones solving the puzzles?I love to give bonuses to die rolls for good roleplay/description. I  also agree that a die roll should perhaps give important clues or hints  for solving a puzzle (rather than simply solving it), but the game  should not rely on player statements as a default mechanic for resolving  in-game scenarios. Some play groups love these types of puzzles, and have no problem removing the roleplay and using the metagame to solve puzzles as a group--no rules are needed for them. For the rest of us, skills and stats need to matter, especially when our character is something we could never hope to be.Riddle me this: Rather than using dice to make an attack, a player with real-world melee fighting skills describes an excellent attack-defense-counter strategy against an opponent. Should this player then not have to make hit/damage rolls, because they have roleplayed the combat more effectively? Sure, the game has specific rules for die rolls in combat . . . doesn't the game have specific rules for die rolls out of combat, too?</blockquote>