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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quasqueton" data-source="post: 1956707" data-attributes="member: 3854">In our very first game session in this current campaign, the PCs went into the cargo hold of a large ocean-going ship. They knew there was some kind of dangerous creature down there, and they were sent down to investigate.A hatchling blue dragon leapt out of the shadows, onto a crate, and roared at them. I rolled an Intimidate check for the dragon. The 2nd-level PCs rolled their "resist Intimidate" checks. 3 of the 4 PCs failed their resist checks. Ironically, the 1 who resisted actually turned and ran away screaming "Dragon!" in fear. The 3 who failed their resistance actually jumped and attacked the dragon.I did not force the PCs to do anything. They reacted as they wanted, and later we all laughed at how they all acted exactly opposite what the in-game circumstances suggested. Their actions made no sense in the game context, and they all admit that.The in game situation and game mechanics suggested that 3 of them "act intimidated", in whatever way that would be shown by their characters. Most people would not think "attack the dragon" was an appropriate way to play the situation. And the "un-intimidated" character probably shouldn't have run away screaming. But I did not tell them how to act, and did not "punish" them in any way for their actions. But it was apparent to all present that they didn't really role play the situation in the logical/realistic/proper way.How would you have played this encounter? Maybe the dragon should have known they were PCs and could not be affected by the Intimidate skill? Maybe he should have just pounced on them instead for his surprise round action?Quasqueton</blockquote>

Verification