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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="olshanski" data-source="post: 3740957" data-attributes="member: 7441">Well by your definition above, you are still rewarding the silver-tongued power gamers by giving them a bonus to their skill check based on a good performance.I could easily see a situation where a wallflower trying to be the negotiator regularly gets a -2 modifier for failing to get into character, much less saying anything remotely socially acceptable... while the group thespian regularly scores a bonus of +2 or more because he is able to play in character and still use convincing argument. It appears the effort to use a diplomacy skill or charisma ability is simply used to mitigate the fact that some people are more adept than others at social situations....That makes me ask myself...What is gained by this mitigation process and what is lost?What's lost is that ocasionally the group thespian (the player) is denied a chance to shine because of what is written on his character sheet... in exchange, a wallflower player's character has a chance to shine, regardless of how bumbling and incompetent the player is with social situations. Certainly, in many cases the shy member of the group will play the low CHA dwarf, while in other cases the handsome and loquatious player chooses to go the bard route and be the face person for the group. In this case, the reality mimics the players and you are back to the whole argument about rewarding the player that fences with modifier on his characters BAB.How damaging to the game would it be if there were no CHA ability and no Diplomacy skill?I guess what I am asking is "Is there any method other than straight DM fiat for situations in which you let the players roleplay and ignore the CHA or Diplomacy?"</blockquote>

Verification