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: 5749160" data-attributes="member: 8835">Which gets to the crux of the OT (oh wait, that's me).How do you arbitrate that without invoking your own bias.I can see a clean ruling for doing a skill check for the Don Juan attempt with each lady.How do you arbitrate the quantity or quality of my ideas for my 8 INT/WIS barbarian?I realize, you'll never please all of us with a rule proposal.  But I think if you're going to have expectations on how such a PC behaves, you've got to codify it if you're going to enforce it.I know I don't like the idea of making the party roll per PC to see if they think of my idea. Or of my PC being forced to say your idea because your PC is stupid and mine is smart.  My ideas are mine, yours are yours.  That's why I file patents with my name on them.I'd also caution that when you put a limit or counter on ideas, then you need to fully account for all ideas.  Like the old joke at HP, if the company owns all my good ideas, don't they also own all my bad ideas and therefore I am not responsible for them either?There's also the table-chat bleed-over problem.  If we're all in the middle of a combat and the players are discussing tactics, then the smart players are feeding ideas to the dumb players.  This bypasses any segregation of ideas to PC silos by their stats.As a note from the other thread, I have a hypocritical view on this.  I do play my half-orc barbarian with low/average INT/CHA as less social, less friendly and not contributing to battle plans and solutions.  Being a smart player, I still cheat and avoid taking stupid actions myself.  But I try to play in a way that does not present him as a genius diplomat to the rest of the party.  But like Shaman, I see that this is an area the rules do not manage very well, and as such I avoid interfering with as a GM.</blockquote>

Verification