Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8474676" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Nothing has so far been shown to me that contradicts my assertion that the outcome of an attempt to force a player’s character to make a certain decision is not uncertain.“Deploying Proficiencies” is not how proficiencies work, by my understanding of the rules.Monsters do use ability checks like players do to accomplish tasks in my understanding of the rules (or to be more accurate, the DM employs ability checks to resolve monsters’ actions like they call for the players to make ability checks to resolve PCs’ actions).What use of a Charisma skill to influence what a PC thinks are you referring to? I don’t recall anyone citing such a rule.I don’t see how that’s a “trick.” What a character knows and what a character thinks are different. They just are. Words mean things.You mean the assumption that all the text in the rulebook is rules text? I’m not shy about my interpretation being founded on that assumption. I think it’s a pretty good assumption. The alternative would be that the rule books contain some text that isn’t rules, and doesn’t call that text out as special. Now, maybe that is indeed the case, and if it is, my position doesn’t really hold up. But as the text is unclear on the matter, we have to assume one way or the other. Any interpretation of the text must be based either on the assumption that the text in question is rules, or the assumption that it is not. Personally, I think the assumption that the text in the rule book is rules is the stronger one.I don’t think that what you’ve presented as evidence against my position… is. It doesn’t contradict my position like you say it does. So far the best argument against my case I’ve seen is that I’m merely assuming all the text in the rule book is rules, and see above for my stance on that matter. I don’t think you’ve demonstrated that my argument is circular. I’ve explained how each of my assertions flows from one to the other. I would actually argue (and I have, in this thread) that the notion that the social skills are an exception to the player’s ability to decide what their character does is circular, because it relies on the results of a successful ability check to justify the making of an ability check in the first place. It assumes it’s premise that an ability check should be made in that situation.</blockquote>

Verification