Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5744595" data-attributes="member: 8835">Barrastrondo makes some good points about [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]'s concerns.There are probably fewer instances of a player using his powers of speech to perform gaming miracles that a skill check would have refuted.[MENTION=40166]prosfilaes[/MENTION]' method would further ensure that, by the concept of translating my approach and intent to a skill check, rather than taking me literally that what and how I say it is absolutely how it happens (given that PCs are likely talking an imaginary language, that's a reasonable assumption that a high skill check result means I correctly use "Your Grace" in the right places, etc).I might also challenge the implied assumption that a 10 CHA means we suck at social interactions.  The average real person does not suck at social interactions.  Therefore, the average person CAN handle being polite, having manners, and persuading others.  It's also worth noting that each of us varies in the quality of our interactions.  Sometimes I'm jerkier than I am right now.  Other times, I am supremely diplomatic and persuasive and my words contribute to the Corporate Bottom Line (as in I get new business, calm down customers, sway opinions).But still the point may be missed.  As a GM or fellow player, you may NOT DETECT that I am using my brains or silver tongue.  I had a friend who damn near killed his PC when he announced he was going to jump from one platform to another (with no indication of the distance between or our height).  I am not such an idiot.  None of my PCs, regardless of their INT will be played so stupidly as to make a fatally reckless move like that.Absence of making stupid moves is not proof that I am playing my PC as smarter than his INT implies.I may avoid proposing plans to the party, or even participate in the planning (just tell me who to hit).In dealing with the Duke of Whatever, I may simply be silent during discussions with him.  Or before the encouter, tell another PC to try not to piss him off so he'll pay us.But I haven't actually done anything blatantly smarter or more charming than my stat says.Additionally, if I'm feeling persuasive enough, as a player, I may convince the GM to consider my proposal, whereas the blunt one will simply be ignored.  The person to person aspect is where the charismatic player has an advantage with the GM.  And that's where the game rules offer no protection,because HUMAN INTERACTION has no protection from the ways of human interaction.And to sort of rebutt "Why are social interaction mechanics treated differently?" one more time...It's because in a way, you can't.  There's too many fuzzy ways that me being smart or charming sneaks into game play, regardless of the rules.  It therefore may be worth considering that the WIS/INT/CHA scores do not represent the aspects a player brings to the table, because they ultimately can't enforce it.  Not like STR/DEX/CON do.Therefore, it might be cleaner to just say:INT/WIS/CHA impact the game elements as the rules indicate.How clever, social, tactical or resourceful your PC is is wholly within the domain of the player.So, you state what you say or do, and that IS how smart or charming your PC is.  The outcome of any attempts are still dictated by pertinent skill checks and game rules (can't cast extra spells just because the player has a good memory).And that is as easily explained by people I've known who thought they were smarter than their actions belied.  Or would try to speak diplomatically or business-like, but as the words were delivered from their mouth, lacked the same impact as rendered from my own.</blockquote>

Verification