D&D General Styles of D&D Play

[Paul Farquhar]

Okay. Is that somehow advocating that people do that thing?

Yes. It teaches that is the way to do win, just as The Prisoner's Dilemma is set up to make a certain behaviour optimal.

There is no such thing as an apolitical political simulation game, because unlike the real world the game designers set the parameters.

If, in your game, "each innocent life saved earns you ten years off purgatory", then you are promoting a different winning strategy to "buy up all the property you can".

 

[Maxperson]

No one is arguing that we should make a change.

We are saying that D&D, THE elves and dwarves game, doesn't support being a super smart elf or a super wise dwarf outside of combat and exploration very well.

The does in fact support those things. Intelligence checks to figure stuff out, knowledge skills, investigation checks(int based) to figure things out, etc. support super smart elf, human, flying cockroach or whatever. Wisdom checks, knowledge skills, insight checks, etc. support being super wise. There are also spells that support both if used in ways to do that.

There are tools in D&D to support virtually any playstyle you can imagine. That's why I say, and I'm saying it for the second time in this thread, D&D's strength is in doing virtually any playstyle decently to well. It just doesn't do any of them great. If you want great, you need to go to a different game whose focus is on that one playstyle or few playstyles that you like best.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which is the point I'm making. The OP is claiming that D&D is good at dealing with politics.

No they don't. They say "these are the types of games I have observed people playing". They don't say D&D is good at doing any of them.

 

[Maxperson]

Exactly.
You roll dice, add bonuses, and compare the sum to a DC

My Niece's Elf Wizard rolls. Using her elf's 18 INT and proficiency in Investigation to realize that that guard over there has muddy shoes.

Rollplay lets you roleplay something not like yourself than Freeform unless you are an actor or other member of the performance community.

Rollplay can help, but it's not NEEDED. The DM shouldn't be making people roll for simple stuff like muddy shoes. The elf is a literal genius and is an expert at investigation to boot. Sherlock Holmes didn't run around making 50 skill checks when he walked into the room. There are also spells, class abilities, and so on that require no roll, but which can aid various roleplaying activities around that concept.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Rollplay can help, but it's not NEEDED.

Nothing is needed in game design. That this is not needed is not special, nor any kind of criticism.

 

[Oofta]

Then you were simply using skill challenges incorrectly. Both of those things should always matter when running a skill challenge. A wisely-chosen turn of phrase or clever action should earn a success without rolling; a truly self-sabotaging action should earn a failure without rolling. The state of play should change from one action to the next, that's the whole point of having initiative involved. As others have said, there may even be cases where a particularly clever/foolish or complete response just ends the challenge one way or the other; this should be rare but hardly impossible.

No wonder you hate skill challenges so much.

It doesn't take several pages to explain skill challenges in an effective and productive way. I could easily do it in just two. (Not counting space eaten up by art or things like tables of difficulty values or the like, of course.)

Maybe you did it differently. DMs I played with did not and after a bit I used my own version and ignored official rules. But ... and this is the important bit ... nowhere in the rules does it talk about what people say or do matters much other than potentially giving advantage on the roll. No matter what, you have to roll to see success or failure, potentially with advantage. I linked to the rules in my post, but I grabbed the relevant text

Spoiler: Relevant Skill Challenge Rules

To deal with a Skill Challenge, the player characters make skill checks to accumulate a number of successful skill uses before they rack up 3 failures. Depending on complexity you had to get up to 12 successes.
[as I said, spells or abilities might be used]... using spells or abilities might contribute successes or even remove failures from the running total.
...
Sometimes, a player tells you, “I want to make a Persuasion check to convince the duke that helping us is in his best interest.” That’s great -- the player has told you what she’s doing and what skill she’s using to do it.

Other times, a player will say, “I want to make a Persuasion check.” In such a case, prompt the player to give more information about how the character is using that skill.

Sometimes, characters do the opposite: “I want to scare the duke into helping us.” It’s up to you, then, to decide which skill the character is using and call for the appropriate check.

If a player comes up with a particularly clever use of their skills, you should give them advantage on the roll.

Then, depending on the success or failure of the check, describe the consequences, and go on to the next Player Character.

You can’t start a Skill Challenge until the PCs know their role in it, and that means giving them a couple of skills to start with.
...
Thinking players are engaged players. In Skill Challenges, players will come up with uses for skills that you didn’t expect to play a role. Try not to say no. Instead, let them make a roll using the skill but at a hard DC

[bold added]

I use a similar structure now and then as explained in the 5E DMG. But there's no counting successes and failures, what the players say or do may absolutely lead to an automatic success with no more checks or in rare cases an automatic failure. But again the rules are here: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L3dYW-IFahTdYhpPtyH. I looked them up to refresh my memory. At it's core it was rollplay, not roleplay.

If you didn't run skill challenges the way I described you were not following the rules, which is fine because I thought they were crap.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure but

2 editions didn't have skills by default.
None of the editions had a decently balanced skill system for even the play styles D&D was designed for or excelled at.
And the magic system, completely run roughshod over the skill system if you don't do a bunch of fights to consume spell slots.

I'm begging to think the best way to do D&D is to organize skill by playstyle and have groups include them by preferece

• Hack and slash
  • Athletics
  • Acrobatics
  • Bend Bars/Lift Gates
  • Concentration
  • Perception
  • Sleight of Hand
  • Stealth
• Problem Solving
  • Animal Handling
  • Insight
  • Arcana
  • History
  • Investigation
  • Medicine
  • Nature
  • Perception
  • Religion
• Character Driven
  • Craft
  • Deception
  • Insight
  • Intimidation
  • Performance
  • Persuasion
  • Profession
• Historical Simulation
  • Animal Handling
  • Craft
  • Etiquette
  • Medicine
  • Profession
  • Survival
• Slapstick
  • Sleight of Hand
  • Concentration
  • Drinking
• Monty Haul
  • Craft
  • Profession
• Tactical
  • Athletics
  • Acrobatics
  • Bend Bars/Lift Gates
  • Concentration
• Political
  • Etiquette
  • Deception
  • Insight
  • Intimidation
  • Performance
  • Persuassion
  • Profession
• Survival
  • Dungeoneering
  • Survival

Your lists are very light. I'm going to pick one to show you how.

• Problem Solving
  • Animal Handling
  • Insight
  • Arcana
  • History
  • Investigation
  • Medicine
  • Nature
  • Perception
  • Religion
  • Athletics: can be used to solve problems like how to cross a ravine, trapped room, swim down to pull the needed lever, etc.
  • Acrobatics: can be used to cross a narrow ledge or rope
  • Sleight of Hand: can be used to get needed items from those who are unwilling or who you don't want to know that you have an items. Heist movies and shows make use of this all the time to solve problems.
  • Stealth: no explanation needed.
  • Medicine: can be used to solve problems involving illnesses and/or injury.
  • Survival: lots of outdoor problems will make use of this one.
  • Deception: can be used to trick people into doing things for you or getting out of your way so the problem becomes easier or is solved.
  • Performance: similar to the above, or just to pretend to be an entertainer of some sort to get into the venue or wherever. Helps a ton to solve problems.
  • Persuasion: similar to the two above.
  • Barbarian Danger Sense: helps avoid trap damage when problem solving allowing you to live to solve the problem.

I can continue on and on and on and on, but I think you probably get the point. Problem solving is far more than mental problems. There are physical problems to overcome as well and just about every ability in the game will be useful at various points. This sort of thing applies to most playstyles. There are a great many more tools available than you guys are giving credit for.

 

[Maxperson]

OK, spoke to my DM and rather than go back to my previous post I will respond here. He was speaking specifically about 5e.

My DM said skill checks are the basic resolution system, but that the DMG has several guidelines (aka rules - he doesn't like to call anything a rule) that cover different types of play. He said in our games we typically handle political and stronghold type scenarios through the downtime guidelines in the DMG and Xanthar's and sprinkle in the social interaction guidelines in the DMG with skill checks as needed. He said there is also a factions and renown system in the DMG and some of the supplements, but he hasn't actually looked at those in a long time.

Beyond the core books he said there is support for just about any style of game from some 3pp. So he believes 5e at least has support for lots of play styles.

All of this is true, including the DMG being guidelines. The 5e DMG itself calls what is in the DMG guidelines

 

[Minigiant]

Rollplay can help, but it's not NEEDED. The DM shouldn't be making people roll for simple stuff like muddy shoes. The elf is a literal genius and is an expert at investigation to boot. Sherlock Holmes didn't run around making 50 skill checks when he walked into the room. There are also spells, class abilities, and so on that require no roll, but which can aid various roleplaying activities around that concept.

Never said they are need.

I just said

1. Rollplay is a valid playstyle
2. WOTC states Rollplay is a valid playstyle in the DMG
3. Many D&D fans state Rollplay is not a valid playstyle
4. Many D&D fans state Rollplay is an inherently bad playstyle
5. WOTC supported Rollplay very poorly with poorly balanced throwaway mechanics.
6. Likely some D&D designers might be 3 & 4.
7. WOTC put a lot of glut mechanics and explanations in the DMG, setting books, and option books that are rarely used or tertiary in desire but did not support many of playstyles they claim to be in 5e with full effort design.
8. After ceding playstyle variant rules and modules to 3rd party publishers, WOTC saw how much money they left on the table and are finally attempting to serious support more playstyles.

 

[Clint_L]

See, right there, that's the trick.

You are 100% right. You don't need rules to determine the reactions. That is 100% true. You can certainly free form that and decades of gamers have done exactly that.

But, that's not quite the question is it? The question isn't, "do we need this?" No. The question is, "Does the system SUPPORT this?"

And the answer, in a rules absent system, is no, it does not support it in any way. The reaction is 100% dependent on the DM. And, if the DM decides that the reaction is something that the players don't like? Too bad. They can suck it up. Even though no one at the table is enjoying the game because of the DM's decision, it doesn't matter. It's all on the DM's shoulders. So, when the DM decides something that the table enjoys (note, enjoy, not like - that's a different thing) then that is a great DM who everyone applauds. But, when the DM decides something that the table doesn't enjoy, it is equally the fault/responsibility of the DM.

Whereas in a system where these reactions are supported by the mechanics, there is a framework in place which determines that reaction. SInce we're all choosing to play this system, presumably we like this framework. Note, we could also, just as easily, choose to ignore this framework in this situation in favor of something the table likes better. No problems. But, with the framework there, you have a starting place to work from. Without that framework, it's all guesswork and, as you say @Lanefan, trial and error. With error resulting in people at the table having a bad time.

I'd much rather that the system had something in place to support what we're trying to do. Claiming that it's better to have no mechanical support means that you are presuming that the DM will make the correct ruling every single time, regardless of how experienced that DM is.

In Soviet Russia, game plays you!