Social Skills: Role versus Roll Play

[Cybern]

I agree that a mix of roll and role is the way to go, but when that ugly dwarf who smells like a toilet bowl starts to explain to peasants how he and his friend are just here to help and will take care of the kobold problem without asking for anything in return, and gets irked (sp?) when I ask him to roll.

Let's say I gave him a +2 for good roleplaying, and he rolls a 4 (3 -1 cha +2 situation), and I tell him that they aren't listening to him, since the smell alone disgust them, and they can't quite get the dwarven accent and he spoke too fast, he starts arguing about how good his speech was.

I do, however, LOVE to play low cha characters. I have a LG, 6 cha dwarf, and I try to put insults in all my sentences. "This guy's good beef, even smells like one!" is actually a praise, and "You cutie piggy" is his way of telling a girl that he likes her. Of course he doesn't lie, so bluff ain't a problem.

IMC, one player played an intelligent tiefling who almost got beaten (by other PCs) for using his darkness power when they got in a fight. She argued that since she had that power, she could use it, while others told her they'd hang her next time. I told her how she could have played her high int (17) and use it to block (so to speak) one front, or to cast it on the end of a rope and swing it in circles so the darkness moved and hindered mostly ennemies. All I got was a "I'm not 17 int, so you give me these ideas before the fight, and I'll use them". "Ok then, but you won't get XP for the clever trick, you know!"... "Why? My char did it" and so on.

For the "Squall" paladin, the problems doesn't concern paladins (don't wanna be flamed), but the difference between Cha and Comeliness (or appearance in other RPGs). This player (the same than the tiefling) wanted to play an antisocial, top-model, over sure of himself paladin. In the end we let her do it, but asked her to play like the Cha 18 that she rolled up. Then she hit us with her "I don't HAVE to play my cha ALL the time". The DM once asked her to described how she turned undeads, and she said something about holding her holy symbol. He asked her if her Pal said anything, and she said "Whatever" (remember Squall?). She got mad when he said that nothing happened, and that the ghouls came on in spite of the Holy Whatever.

I know Cha (and social skills, to some extent) is many "stats" in one, Appearance, Likedness, Self-Confidence, Manipulation, Poise, Attitude and others, but you can't just take one and forget the others. For example, you could say the guy is overconfident, and doesn't have stage-fright, but how is that guy supposed to sing better, tell better lies, get the giants to like him (...) better than the guy who lacks confidence but his funny and friendly and and and ...

 

[Psion]

For many folks D&D is just a strategy game and nothing more. With all the emphasis WotC puts on minis and combat over character personality merits and flaws (which there are none) I'm pretty sure WotC feels their audience is more strategy oriented as well. Heck, just look at what the system is called versus what White Wolf calls their system. D20 System versus the Storyteller System.

Dice rolling is the norm and roleplaying is the backseat. :/

So it's the marketeers that determine the nature of the market, not the people that comprise it now.

Not that I am saying you are wrong, but I sure like to think you are, and sure don't think that's much of a determining factor.

I am hoping I'll be vindicated when the minis handbook and line of products flops.

 

[SnowDog]

I've seen the exact opposite problem as well where the player is a natural leader and the other players defer to their judgement but the character's CHA is horribly low with little or no social skills.

In situations like that, I think it's best to communicate clearly with the player (usually the player in this situation is well aware of the situation he's in). Asking that the player invest some small portion of his character's experience in social skills to compensate for how the other players treat him is one way to help mold the game to reflect reality.

Another is to ask the player to tone it down a notch, or as DM create situations where the submissive player(s) are forced to make decisions, and have the dominant player give them all kinds of praise and support for it, trying to mold the sumissive player into at least having some semblance of a spine.

 

[Cybern]

With all the emphasis WotC puts on minis and combat over character personality merits and flaws (which there are none) I'm pretty sure WotC feels their audience is more strategy oriented as well.

That's a good point, I've just noticed that ALL the other games I play have merits and flaws. Silhouette (Heavy Gear, Tribe 8), Storyteller (Vampire...), Shadowrun, whatever, they all have some "official" if not optional Merits/Flaws system. When I create a DnD char, I tend to think in terms of merits/flaws when fleshing out my concept, even without game mechanics.

Why is D20 free of merits and flaws?

time to start a thread....

 

[Psion]

Why is D20 free of merits and flaws?

It's not. Are note "merits" "Feats"? As for flaws, various publishers have tried to put their own spin on the concept. Most of them tend to convince me that not having flaws in an RPG is a good thing...

 

[Belen]

The problem is that your class should not force you into a social role. Why does a Bard or Rogue have to be the face man? A great performer need not be great as dealing with people. Look at all the stage actors that come off as jerks off the stage or screen.

One issue is that sometimes a Bard or Rogue is forced to be the social person when no other character class can substitute because they just cannot get the skills there.

Hmm...maybe the social skills can become class skills with a minimum charisma score. Or!

One social skill becomes a class skill for every Cha. modifier. Thus a fighter with a charisma of 14 could have diplomacy and bluff. This way, it is not a dump stat. You have to be charismatic to use them, and it does not invalidate character concepts!

Rogues and bards would still be better because they retain the social skills as class skills no matter what!

Dave

 

[Cybern]

One social skill becomes a class skill for every Cha. modifier. Thus a fighter with a charisma of 14 could have diplomacy and bluff. This way, it is not a dump stat. You have to be charismatic to use them, and it does not invalidate character concepts!

That's a good one! I think I'll use it IMC.

 

[Gothmog]

I agree with you BelenUmeria, the social skills can be relied upon too heavily, which in turn kills roleplaying. My solution is for the DM to roll the appropriate skill against a DC that depends on the situation, as described in the PHB and DMG. Then, without knowing the result of the roll, the player must roleplay out the interaction. If the player does well, he gets his full roll total, while a crappy performance results in their roll being cut in half. If the player rolls crappy, but pulls off a superb RP performance, I give him an extra 5 to his roll. Thus, the social skills are still useful, while the RP aspect is still important since it governs the degree of success.

 

[TalonComics]

It's not. Are note "merits" "Feats"? As for flaws, various publishers have tried to put their own spin on the concept. Most of them tend to convince me that not having flaws in an RPG is a good thing...

I wouldn't say Feats are Merits per se mainly because there's no way to balance them with Flaws. Feats as a whole is just a game mechanic to further modify classes to avoid the whole 2nd Ed. clone class problem. Of course if WotC adopted the whole Anti-Feat angle like the Kalamar Player's Guide has I think we'd see some pretty twinked out characters.
As for Flaws I was think along the lines of the Hero System's Disadvantages system.

Maybe we'll see something like a Merits and Flaws system in 4th Ed? I would just like to see Roleplaying more emphasized over die-rolling. I don't think the new Mini game will fail because it emphasizes die rolling. I think it's going to fail because it's just Chainmail 2.0.

~D

 

[Arc]

Our campaign had a situation like the ones described here. One of our players was playing a Cha 20 cleric with full ranks in Diplomacy and Bluff, skill boosting items, and synergy bonuses out the wazoo. Unfortunately, the player isn't a very social guy, has a very hard time phrasing himself properly, and often doesn't have the slightest clue how to negotiate or converse diplomatically. So it basically turned into 'My character is going to talk him into it, lemme roll Diplomacy... ah, a 34.' Before the DM allowed him to just roll his diplomacy checks, he would occasionally ask another player to phrase his speeches for him, simply because he couldn't.

This type of play is both frustrating and nice to see. Frustrating, because it removes the role-play from the game, and makes it more based on dice and skill ranks than player cleverness. Nice, because it allows a shy player to play a character normally outside of his normal realm, and give him the ability to succeed.

Interestingly enough, the player in question has progressively gotten better at his in character speeches and roleplaying. It seems that because the outcome no longer entirely depends on his words, he's less nervous about them, and more willing to try playing his character in inventive ways.