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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 5816889" data-attributes="member: 3887">Oh sure, you could get the same result from a formal system -- but if, during a session, I'm about to hand out a "whacking great bonus" (nice phrase, BTW), I'd probably just forgo the roll. A that point, I don't need the system to determine the result. I've already (mostly) decided (by virtue of assigning the big bonus).To me, it's like presenting the players with a riddle, listening to them solving the riddle, then making them roll to solve the riddle they've already solved, but with a bonus to the roll (for actually solving the riddle). If they've solved it, the question's been answered, move on.I know. And I'm not arguing for the removal of social mechanics -- I just prefer to use them selectively, mainly to allow less chatty/extroverted players the chance to play a Casanova (or a Kissinger!)Absolutely. AD&D's reaction rolls happen right at the start of an encounter (I think). They set the initial attitude of the NPCs, before the players do anything. So you could say they set the base difficulty.3e social skill checks occur in response to player speech/action. So they provide explicit pass/fail branching during the encounter. In AD&D, there's no mechanic to decide the believability of a specific statement. The other big difference is 3e requires players to sink resources in socially-adept PCs as they level. A CHA 15 AD&D fighter is always charismatic. A CHA 15 3e fighter is kinda-sorta charismatic, but requires careful grooming as they level in order to be capable as both face and fighter (and 3e makes this specific type needlessly difficult to create).  Out of curiosity - why? Doesn't this place more emphasis on a player's character building skills and die rolls than their live play around the table? Oh sure... I'm not questioning whether words+(good) system can produce interesting and satisfying results. It's just that I'm after a particular kind of satisfaction; "winning" on the strength of what I (or my players) actually say. Sometimes it doesn't matter if their are interesting consequences for solving/not-solving the riddle. What matters, where the fun is, is the act of solving the riddle. I've *yet* to play Burning Wheel... perhaps this year. The Duel of Wits sounds fascinating, I'd love to see what it produces with my gaming group. Does BW handle satire well?</blockquote>

Verification