Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ferratus" data-source="post: 5797662" data-attributes="member: 55966">I'm not a big fan of using rolls to resolve social interaction.   I find the Diplomacy skill is the biggest detriment to roleplaying in the game, as players generally use it as a "do what I say because you like me" button.  It also shuts down characters from engaging in non-combat encounters if they have a low charisma (I'm looking at you fighter).Playing 2e vs. 3e/4e was like night and day.  When we switch to 2e in my ongoing campaign last summer, suddenly my players' interest and frequency of non-combat encounters spiked.   The guy who played the ranger who goes to take a nap in non-combat encounters was suddenly front and center in negotiations and wheeling and dealing.  I had just assumed as a warhammer player he just wasn't interested in RP, but it was just because he hadn't played a high charisma character in the five years I'd known him.   Even my wife, who largely plays D&D to hang out with our mutual friends rather than being strongly interested in roleplaying, was more engaged and contributing.My warhammer guy was enough of a wargamer though that he missed the minis and combat options of 4e, and my wife hated Vancian casting.   There were also complaints about save or die from all the players.  Thus being outvoted, we went back to 4e, and the first RP encounter that came up, the other players looked at the sorcerer (the high charisma character) and my wife rolled a diplomacy score to get past the gate of a city ruled by a despot.   She then said,  "He likes us, so he should just let us in without checking us out or what we're carrying".Well, I was very annoyed to say the least, and shocked that such a small rule could have such a profound impact on the tenor of the game.   What followed was a long argument about what Diplomacy was for and how it should be properly used.   I argued that Diplomacy shouldn't replace roleplaying and that a guard isn't just going to risk his neck for you against his evil master just because he likes you; she still needed to figure out what he would accept to change his mind and accept the risk of betraying his duty.  They argued that the diplomacy score meant that they shouldn't have to give out a bribe but just that they are so slick that they can just fast-talk their way past.I dug in my heels of course (because I'm the DM) but the argument kept on returning.  One player then asked "well what's the point of diplomacy then, if you insist on having us figure it out without it?".   So I banned all the charisma based skill checks from the game, and my players retrained out of them.Like magic the level of roleplaying and engagment with NPC's returned to 2e levels.  So I'm firmly convinced that social skills, and tying the success of those skills to charisma, were the single biggest detriment to roleplaying in the history of the game.   Now that I've seen it, I cannot unsee.</blockquote>

Verification