Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8475175" data-attributes="member: 16814">The only argument you have for this is the assumption that all text not otherwise stated is rules, and that this means the single sentence on pg 174 of the PHB under the heading "Roleplaying" is a controlling rule.  To do this, you have to discount other written text, like monsters having proficiencies.  You do this by suggesting these only exist for GM solo play, which is as unsupported by anything else in the rules as you assert that NPCs making social moves against PCs being adjudicated via ability checks is unsupported.  Your claims include the very thing you're saying they are standing against!  Multiple times over!  It's a flawed argument, as flawed as the one you are trying to argue against.  The rules suck for support for either position, and both have to essentially start from begged questions.  There is no clear path through RAW to either argument.  This is what I've been arguing all along -- your argument is as flawed and possesses many of the same qualities as what you say it's better than.  To me, they're both terrible arguments.  They both rely on begged questions and special pleading.  The issue with using social moves on PCs is that they're utterly toothless -- why bother with a thing if it has no impact?Again, I admire the end goal, but I do not agree with the means you're pushing to get there.</blockquote>