Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 2681686" data-attributes="member: 386">I thought I might have been.  I am sorry if I caused any offense; none was meant. I think that's a great question.  I would answer by saying that the rules reward players for playing a certain way (the strategic way).  (Although they don't penalize anyone for role-playing.)  I also think that players who never really wanted lots of role-playing but instead wanted to get down to the "core story" of D&D (adventurers go to a dangerous location, kill things, take their stuff, get better at it, rinse and repeat) are much better served with 3e.  I'm not familiar with those games.  But I'd say it comes down to the reward system.  D&D is built around strategic play, especially combat.  That's what you get rewarded for, and your characters get better at it over time.  If those games reward other types of play, I'd say that yes, they are less focused on combat.A system that has detailed conflict rules for social interaction would favour that type of play more; but if the result of those conflicts did not enhance your character's ability in social interaction (and thus the player's ability to "do more" in the social interaction realm), it would be missing out.I hear that Spycraft 2.0 has some detailed social interaction rules.  If you tied that to the CR/XP system, and advancing in levels allowed you to become better at social interaction, I'd say that the focus would have shifted away from combat (at least somewhat).I think that D&D's social interaction rules are a little on the light side.  It usually doesn't feel satisfying (to me) when all you have to do is roll one skill check (Bluff or Diplomacy, typically) and the encounter is resolved.Warning: rambling thoughts ahead...I wonder what it would look like if you took the combat rules and just applied them to Diplomacy.  Instead of weapons, you'd pick something like "rapier wit (1d6, 18-20/x2)" or "onslaught of will (2d6, 19-20/x2)".  You'd roll your Diplomacy instead of Attack, still doing hit point damage (or perhaps Social HP) against some kind of Social AC... and then all you'd have to do is map all the combat actions to social ones (trip - he stutters and mumbles, off-balance and can't keep his train of thought because of your impressive display of wit).I'd set it up so that you'd have to narrate how you make your "attack roll".</blockquote>

Verification