Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8476931" data-attributes="member: 23751">He doesn't have to have written the books, be a WotC employee or mind reader.&nbsp; He just has to be able to read what was written.&nbsp; Uncertainty with regard to ability checks is per RAW decided before the roll happens.&nbsp; I and the two other DMs in my group also don't need to roll to see how to describe orcs.&nbsp; It's really, really easy to just describe an orc as being as intimidating as we like, then if necessary roll the ability check to see if the intimidation was successful or not.Because they don't show what you think they show.This is a Strawman of what [USER=97077]@iserith[/USER] just said.&nbsp; First, the DM can author responses without a skill, but yes, skills don't give the DM that ability.&nbsp; Second, the roleplaying rules are what give the player the ability to decide whether social skills affect his PC and to what degree, not a skill.Or just follow the rules and the DM describes the environment, including what the orcs are doing.You are also not following RAW if you use ability checks for how well an orc intimidates someone.&nbsp; Ability checks are by RAW to determine success or failure of uncertain ability checks.&nbsp; There's not one word about using them to see how well someone does something.You don't get to speak for everyone.&nbsp; He hasn't convinced you, but you're a far cry from everyone.You've attempted to support yours with rules that don't say what you think they do, but that's not the same as giving your claims real support.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8476931, member: 23751"] He doesn't have to have written the books, be a WotC employee or mind reader. He just has to be able to read what was written. Uncertainty with regard to ability checks is per RAW decided before the roll happens. I and the two other DMs in my group also don't need to roll to see how to describe orcs. It's really, really easy to just describe an orc as being as intimidating as we like, then if necessary roll the ability check to see if the intimidation was successful or not. Because they don't show what you think they show. This is a Strawman of what [USER=97077]@iserith[/USER] just said. First, the DM can author responses without a skill, but yes, skills don't give the DM that ability. Second, the roleplaying rules are what give the player the ability to decide whether social skills affect his PC and to what degree, not a skill. Or just follow the rules and the DM describes the environment, including what the orcs are doing. You are also not following RAW if you use ability checks for how well an orc intimidates someone. Ability checks are by RAW to determine success or failure of uncertain ability checks. There's not one word about using them to see how well someone does something. You don't get to speak for everyone. He hasn't convinced you, but you're a far cry from everyone. You've attempted to support yours with rules that don't say what you think they do, but that's not the same as giving your claims real support. [/QUOTE]

Verification