Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mordhau" data-source="post: 8473677" data-attributes="member: 7032137">A lot of modern games struggle to give up on using skill roles to determine things because they have given up on pure randomisation as well.&nbsp; Therefore skills double as this.For example.&nbsp; The PCs want to bribe the guards at the gate.&nbsp; There are two factors that could influence this.&nbsp; One if the PCs are competent at offering a bribe in a way that is not too brazen or doesn't overly&nbsp; offend, and two whether the guards are actually of such a kind that they are bribable.Of the two I think the latter factor is the most important, but in theory this is the part that is left entirely to the GM.&nbsp; In many cases, the skill roll becomes a defacto way to decide if the guards are bribable - which it theoretically shouldn't as that is not something that is dependent on character skill.It is entirely possible for the GM to resolve the action by deciding that there's say a 70% chance the guards are bribable and let the dice decide.&nbsp; As to whether the bribe succeeds - the GM can just decide that yes it does unless the players are really silly about it.Where I actually most want social skills is not for direct interactions but for abstractions.&nbsp; I don't want to role-play out the PC going to every tavern in the town to find or spread rumours, and it's good to have some way to determine how the NPCs&nbsp; feel about a character who they have been travelling with and interacting with off screen. From this perspective, 5e has the social skills in the wrong places.&nbsp; I'd want skills more like Socialise and Leadership, things that let the game zoom out from the minute level of interactions.How I'd prefer to handle interactions is to just give the PCs each a proficient save DC based off their Charisma.&nbsp; Then they can just role-play direct interactions, and, if something is uncertain, (the character is telling a sketchty lie) I can just roll a save for the NPC.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mordhau, post: 8473677, member: 7032137"] A lot of modern games struggle to give up on using skill roles to determine things because they have given up on pure randomisation as well. Therefore skills double as this. For example. The PCs want to bribe the guards at the gate. There are two factors that could influence this. One if the PCs are competent at offering a bribe in a way that is not too brazen or doesn't overly offend, and two whether the guards are actually of such a kind that they are bribable. Of the two I think the latter factor is the most important, but in theory this is the part that is left entirely to the GM. In many cases, the skill roll becomes a defacto way to decide if the guards are bribable - which it theoretically shouldn't as that is not something that is dependent on character skill. It is entirely possible for the GM to resolve the action by deciding that there's say a 70% chance the guards are bribable and let the dice decide. As to whether the bribe succeeds - the GM can just decide that yes it does unless the players are really silly about it. Where I actually most want social skills is not for direct interactions but for abstractions. I don't want to role-play out the PC going to every tavern in the town to find or spread rumours, and it's good to have some way to determine how the NPCs feel about a character who they have been travelling with and interacting with off screen. From this perspective, 5e has the social skills in the wrong places. I'd want skills more like Socialise and Leadership, things that let the game zoom out from the minute level of interactions. How I'd prefer to handle interactions is to just give the PCs each a proficient save DC based off their Charisma. Then they can just role-play direct interactions, and, if something is uncertain, (the character is telling a sketchty lie) I can just roll a save for the NPC. [/QUOTE]

Verification