Social Skills in 3.X

[Quasqueton]

I prefer to have the Player at least tell me what he/she wants to say. We don't necessarily have to play it out to the hilt. But the die roll will determine the result of the attempt. If the Player wants to just say, "I bluff the guard," I'll allow it. But that is the same as just saying, "I attack the guard," in combat. There are tactics and maneuvers one can use to get a better roll.

Just like in combat, there are ways of getting bonuses or penalties depending on the PC's "social tactics".

In combat, you can get a bonus for fighting from higher ground, flanking, catching the defender flat-footed, etc.

In a social engagement, the PC can get bonuses for speaking of the right subject, using a bribe, suggesting an alternative, etc.

For instance, if the Player trying to bluff the guard mentions the guard's boss by name, adds a little bribe that doesn't look like a bribe, and suggests that the guard could hold his sword while he just goes in to check on something for a moment, the PC could get some bonuses.

"Lord Torin asked me to come and look in on his daughter this morning. He said if she is doing well, I was to give you an extra 10 gold for your excellent service. Here, I'll let you hold my sword while I'm inside, just to help you be sure all is safe." -- There's probably a +6 circumstance modifier (+2+2+2).

And of course don't forget magic buffs work for social encounters just like they work for combat. Eagle's splendor to boost Charisma. Prayer gives a bonus to skill checks. Even guidance can help a skill check.

Quasqueton

 

[Gnimish88]

Definately getting alot of feedback, as well as some thoughts, but no real hard and fast way of "fixing" the problem. Having done the reading, I do think that my major complaint is probably that it can come down to having something important fail on one die roll. The argument that combat succeeds or fails on one die roll doesn't really apply, since combat is usually a combination of many rolls and decisions. Granted, sometimes one roll, say a greataxe crit, completely decides the combat, but not usually. That and having to justify making a skill check sticks in my craw. I do agree that giving a bonus for simple roleplaying on the check unfairly benifits good roleplayers whose characters have no such ability. I think that bonuses should be restricted to using info gained ingame, such as knowing that the guard fears his captain and doesn't question orders that are proported to come from him.

 

[DarkMaster]

Definately getting alot of feedback, as well as some thoughts, but no real hard and fast way of "fixing" the problem. Having done the reading, I do think that my major complaint is probably that it can come down to having something important fail on one die roll. The argument that combat succeeds or fails on one die roll doesn't really apply, since combat is usually a combination of many rolls and decisions. Granted, sometimes one roll, say a greataxe crit, completely decides the combat, but not usually. That and having to justify making a skill check sticks in my craw. I do agree that giving a bonus for simple roleplaying on the check unfairly benifits good roleplayers whose characters have no such ability. I think that bonuses should be restricted to using info gained ingame, such as knowing that the guard fears his captain and doesn't question orders that are proported to come from him.

If single roll descion bother you look at Quasqueton post.

 

[DarkMaster]

If single roll descion bother you look at Quasqueton post.

and what about the evil invisible sorcerer cast a fireball on the group, ok you are all in the area of effect. roll dice 24 damage, everybody is injured they all have between 13 and 23 hp.

You will tell me yeah but they could have prepare better before fighting him, I reply true, but the rogue who will do the bluff could also have prepared better by gathering info first and asking the wizard to use some of his knowledge skill, ect, to increase the bonus for a sure success.

I don't thing that there are one roll decide it all situation, at not if you want to keep your group for a while.

 

[Li Shenron]

What's funny is when someone makes a perfectly reasonable-sounding spiel, and then rolls a 3 on their Diplomacy check.

That's fine Hong ... let's think of someone telling a joke to the audience: it doesn't simply depend how good the joke is, but also how good he is in telling it to others.

People with a very good verve on telling jokes can make people laugh at the meanest joke he could think of...

 

[Quasqueton]

What's funny is when someone makes a perfectly reasonable-sounding spiel, and then rolls a 3 on their Diplomacy check.

Take 10 is your friend.

Quasqueton

 

[hong]

Take 10 is your friend.

Quasqueton

Ah, but sometimes taking 10 won't be enough. Especially if they have a low enough bonus that they can actually roll a 3.

Not to mention that my players, for some strange reason, really like rolling dice and as a result almost never take 10. Even when I remind them.

 

[Gnimish88]

I hate it when someone posts a very helpful and insightful reply that I don't see because I am posting one.

That said, I can definately say that the discussion has been helpful, as well as giving me ideas on how to handle roleplaying differently as a player. My thanks all!

 

[Particle_Man]

My DM is nicer to the players. If the player wants, that player can role-play the conversation. If the player chooses (to save time or for some other reason), that player can ask to make a relevant social skill roll instead. (Sometimes done halfway through, with what has gone before acting as a modifier on the die roll).

The players seem happy with this one. The roleplayers can roleplay, and the number crunchers can roll dice. Everyone wins!

 

[DarkMaster]

My DM is nicer to the players. If the player wants, that player can role-play the conversation. If the player chooses (to save time or for some other reason), that player can ask to make a relevant social skill roll instead. (Sometimes done halfway through, with what has gone before acting as a modifier on the die roll).

The players seem happy with this one. The roleplayers can roleplay, and the number crunchers can roll dice. Everyone wins!

And when you don't feel like rolling the dice to fight the dragon who play the dragon? Your DM must be very good!

allow the one proficient with the sword to role play and the number cruncher can roll dice. Everyone wins!

But If you are all happy playing like that, that is perfectly fine. I personally found that it limits role play, since only people with strong personality can play good bluffer and so on. I also found your DM unfair, since he/she doesn't apply the same rule to everybody. If I was playing in your group I would play a rogue with 8 charisma and no social skill and only rely on my personal skill making my character very unbalanced compered to the other character. Let Player who decide to invest in social skill have PC strong in social skill compared to the PC of player who decided not to go this way.