Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6727720" data-attributes="member: 37579">Originally posted by wrecan:I think different people mean different things by "roleplaying rules", and often they are inconsistent. Here's a few:Personal Interaction (or "Act or Die, 20-sided"). These are rules that allow an asocial player to play a social character. These rules could be considered to "facilitate" roleplay by allowing the dice to replace actual acting ability.In OD&D/BECMI/1e, this is handled by Charisma checks. In 2e, this is handled by some non-weapon proficiencies (but mostly Charisma checks). in 3e and 4e, this is handled by Bluff/Intimidate/Diplomacy (and Gather Information/Streetwise).Background Flair (or "Where do Adventurers Come From?"). These are rules that are not as important for the dice, but simply as a sort of mnemonic people use to give their characters a background unrelated to adventuring. OD&D/BECMI don't have rules for this. 1e has Secondary Skills, 2e has Non-Weapon Proficiencies, 3e has the Craft, Perform and Profession Skills (and some related feats), and 4e has Backgrounds.Combat-Free Skills (or "I Know What You Did in-between Adventures"). These are skills that don't facilitate role-play per se, but rather help resolve actions that are not directly related to adventuring. Cooking, riding, writing a play, etc. are skills that are not commonly associated with adventuring in dungeons or confronting dragons. OD&D/BECMI/1e do not have rules for this and expected DMs to make up rules for it on the fly, often with Ability checks. 2e used Non-Weapon Proficiencies for some aspects, but otherwise expected DMs to use Ability checks. 3e assumed Craft, Perform and Profession would cover anything you need (which basically translated into an Int, Cha or Wis check unless you had put skill ranks into these skills). 4e expects you to use Skill Challenges and DMG p.42 (which relies on a combination of Ability Checks, Skill Checks, and circumstance modifiers based on Backgrounds).Obscure Knowledge (or "Who Wants to be a Narrator"?). This is a means by which DMs can filter useful bits of trivia, backstory and exposition to players who can then reveal the information in a dramatically appropriate way. In some senses this also facilitates roelplaying, by giving players something to use when crafting dialog for the character. In OD&D/BEMCI/1e, people generally used Intelligence checks, or the DM just gave out the information as he deemed appropriate. 2e had the same approach, supplemented by some non-weapon proficiencies. 4e also has the same approach, supplemented by the Arcane, Dungeoneering, History, Nature, and Religion Skills. 3e had ten Knowledge Skills, and it was basically assumed that any knowledge the PCs might need would be found under one of those headings, or if it were Common Knowledge, could be known by anybody with a DC 10 Intelligence check.Roleplaying Restrictions (or "You Vill Roleplay und You Vill Like It"!)Some people, when referencing "roleplaying rules" sometimes mean those rules that carry mechanical bonuses or, more often, penalties, if one does not roleplay in a manner that the game has deemed appropriate. The most famous of these rules is alignment, particularly in 1e/2e, when a change of alignment would mean the loss of class levels. These rules add "structure" to roleplaying, by letting players know what was expected of their characters. It also gave the DM a nice carrot and a club to use to keep players in line. Another iteration of this are the descriptions of classes. Druids, for example, in several editions, were not allowed to use worked metal. Clerics in 1e/2e could not use sharp or piercing weapons. Other class variants required specific behavior of the adherents. These were, quite literally, roleplaying rules, because they were rules that dictated how one should roleplay a character. I am hesitant to say these rules "facilitated" roleplay, except insofar as they may have reminded hack-n-slash parties to ocassionally act in character lest they get dinged by these rules. These rules exist in all editions of D&D. They were mildly prevalent in OD&D/BECMI, strong in 1e/2e/3e and almost non-existent in 4e.Now, to the OP's question... whether one "needs" roleplaying rules depends on which of these categories you discuss:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think some form of rules for Combat-Free Skills is necessary, though I don't think it needs a lot of detail. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think rules for Background Flair and Obscure Knowledge are nice, but not "necessary". </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I am deeply ambivalent about Personal Interaction rules. At one extreme, it removes roleplaying. Rather than speaking in character, players just say "I Bluff my way past the Guard" or "I seduce the wench with Diplomacy". At the other extreme, it punishes people who lack acting chops. A middle ground must be sought and that is always a delicate balancing act. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I am not a fan of Roleplaying Restrictions. I don't think they are necessary, except, at most, as part of a specific campaign setting built around the restriction.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification