Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="replicant2" data-source="post: 3310626" data-attributes="member: 16498">You see, the players' real-life abilities should never be the sole influence on his or her character. It's incredibly limiting to think my character is only a pale reflection of me, the player. I'd rather use my imagination and transcend my own personal limits. This is the elemental piece you don't seem able to grasp--when I play a character, I want to play someone larger than myself, larger than life, with abilities far greater than my own. Why should my character be limited by what I, the player, can perform?Why shouldn't players who favor role-playing over combat have a mechanic to reflect that? The reason I'm in favor of some form of social skill mechanic is that mechanics and skills, modified by attributes like intelligence and charisma, allow a player who chooses to play a diplomatic bard, peace-spreading cleric, or inspirational, henchman-leading fighter the opportunity to do so. Skills and rolls provide the mechanics to back it up, just like a wizard has spells and a fighter a high BAB.If you remove the die roll, you effectively remove the PC's motivation for ever playing a character like those I've described above. Sure, he can play them and role-play them to the hilt, but by adjudicating everything by DM fiat, as you've espoused, he is on the exact same playing field as the combat-built barbarian, who can also role-play every encounter as a suave sophisticate should he choose. Does that strike you as fair? Why should a player ever put points into diplomacy, or intimidate? They become wasted skills, by that line of reasoning, and the player would be best served taking tumble or spot.Again, this strikes me as a reach. I'm quite sure there are better systems for role-play out there, but D&D always has been and always will be the 800-lb. gorilla of role-playing games. I think it's safe to assume it's the gateway game of 99% of the role-players out there, many of which cannot find a group of gamers outside of D&D.Why should it be? Make it clear that you are allowing a +5/-5 modifier check for good/unconvincing role play. Take it to a vote.So you accept that, despite brilliant tactics and positioning, your fighter can still miss on 10 consecutive die rolls in a combat, yet you won't accept a dice roll determining a role-played social encounter. I don't get it. Every aspect of the game should include a margin of luck, despite the skill of the character (or player) involved.</blockquote>

Verification