Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="olshanski" data-source="post: 3736243" data-attributes="member: 7441">Are there any examples of what social combat looks like? (I don't have the inclination to purchase new gaming systems just to see if they have a social combat system). {sorry about the simul-post with the one above.. still, more examples would be appreciated}I am very interested in this discussion.I did like the diplomacy check as a way of resolving negotiations, but part of me really missed the whole roleplaying dialogue and getting into character.  It could be that as a DM I wasn't going to force my players to get into character to gain an arbitrary +2 bonus on a check.... The fact that a socially inept player could roleplay a bard with a +30 Diplomacy modifier didn't really add to the game... now you've got a player that can barely string together a sentance while looking you in the eye trying to negotiate peace between two kingdoms... I don't know if providing the opportunity for a real-life wallflower to play a suave, charismatic courtier is really a great benefit.   Perhaps another player is really outgoing, but has chosen to play a barbarian... he has to sit by during any social interaction.Many games work fine by rewarding players for their own real-life strengths. There is nothing fair about trivial pursuit or bridge.In 3.5 D&D, A player who is mathematically inclined and reads a lot of rules is probably going to be better in combat than another player who is not so good with rules.  I believe that in most cases with 3.5, a 10th level character should always be superior to a nearly identical 9th level character, but in truth, if you let a very experienced player run the 9th level character he will be a better combatant than the 10th level character in the hands of an inexperienced player.  Are they going to make rules with 4E so that a new and inexperienced player is going to be just as effective as an experienced and knowledgable player at the same character level?  If both players are using a 15th level fighter, are the two fighters going to be identical in all ways, or will the experienced and mathematically inclined player be able to exploit feats (select the right time to power attack or grapple) in order to make his character more effective?If you can agree that identical characters are going to be more or less effective in combat based on the aptitude and abilities of the players, then why is social interaction somehow treated differently? Why must the playing field be level for social interaction?Do D&D designers want to punish the social players by not allowing them to use their gifts for conversation unless they make certain choices in character development?  (you can argue that the +2 modifier for convincing roleplaying is a nod toward acknowledging that some players simply have a greater chance at success).</blockquote>

Verification