Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 1529953" data-attributes="member: 463">We roll lots of skill checks for social skills - either at player's request or GM's request.  We tend not to let the roll dominate though, but it can help determine whether an attempt succeeds if it's not clear from context whether it would or not.  Last night in SB's game I got a 27 on an Intimidate check vs a low-level Cleric, a good roll, but I still couldn't get him to turn over his prisoner (a PC who was killed in the subsequent rescue attempt) because the context didn't support it - he didn't know my PC was a LG honourable type who'd have kept her word not to kill him if he complied, or to rip his entrails out if the captive was harmed (much entrail-ripping followed).I dunno, I can't seem to justify our approach to Rules Forum interrogation, all I can say is that it seems to work for us.  I'm sure we're deviating from the RAW.  That doesn't particularly bother me.  For most NPCs BTW I _do_ have fully detailed existing NPC sheets w full skill lists - but it may well happen that in play I realise that my vision of the NPC doesn't comply with what's been written down, in which case I'll change what's written down, whether that's lowering STR or raising Diplomacy skill.  In most cases +25 and +30 Diplomacy are effectively identical to me BTW (ie highly diplomatic), the difference would only matter if 2 similarly-skillful diplomatists were competing eg in negotiations, when the +5 of one would give them the edge.</blockquote>

Verification