Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8481862" data-attributes="member: 23751">That isn't how it goes, though.&nbsp; You don't ever decide what affects or does not affect you until AFTER the attempt begins.&nbsp; The circularity is a Strawman argument.&nbsp; You're changing our argument and then coming to a conclusion based on your changes.Our argument is.&nbsp; Social skill is used --&gt; Player makes decision yes or no based on the page 185 rule --&gt; since the outcome is not uncertain no roll is made.&nbsp; It's a completely linear progression.I do the same.Which is a fine way to play, but that's not how skills work as written.&nbsp; The uncertainty in RAW that determines if a roll is needed is purely outcome.&nbsp; Does it succeed or fail.&nbsp; Nothing else. If you don't know if it will succeed or fail prior to the roll, then it is uncertain.&nbsp; If you do, it is not.&nbsp; The variables in descriptions, capabilities and perception aren't determined by the roll, nor in the case of RAW do they determine the success or failure of social skills used by NPCs against PCs. What I do is just look at the circumstances on both sides(PC/NPC) and then choose a description based on that.&nbsp; The NPC is going to do his best, which may be colored by circumstances and perception.&nbsp; Maybe the NPC is so frustrated about something that he screams as he charges.&nbsp; I may describe that as an intimidation attempt even though it isn't.&nbsp; The PC isn't necessarily going to know why the NPC is screaming as he charges, so his perception of what is going on is going to be a bit different than the game reality.Which again is fine, but not what the book says the roll is for.&nbsp; The roll is purely to see whether the action is ultimately successful or not.&nbsp; It doesn't measure the attempt or degree of success/failure.&nbsp; I wouldn't be upset at a game being run that way(so long as I decide how my PC thinks and acts), but it's not what it written for how to adjudicate ability checks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8481862, member: 23751"] That isn't how it goes, though. You don't ever decide what affects or does not affect you until AFTER the attempt begins. The circularity is a Strawman argument. You're changing our argument and then coming to a conclusion based on your changes. Our argument is. Social skill is used --> Player makes decision yes or no based on the page 185 rule --> since the outcome is not uncertain no roll is made. It's a completely linear progression. I do the same. Which is a fine way to play, but that's not how skills work as written. The uncertainty in RAW that determines if a roll is needed is purely outcome. Does it succeed or fail. Nothing else. If you don't know if it will succeed or fail prior to the roll, then it is uncertain. If you do, it is not. The variables in descriptions, capabilities and perception aren't determined by the roll, nor in the case of RAW do they determine the success or failure of social skills used by NPCs against PCs. What I do is just look at the circumstances on both sides(PC/NPC) and then choose a description based on that. The NPC is going to do his best, which may be colored by circumstances and perception. Maybe the NPC is so frustrated about something that he screams as he charges. I may describe that as an intimidation attempt even though it isn't. The PC isn't necessarily going to know why the NPC is screaming as he charges, so his perception of what is going on is going to be a bit different than the game reality. Which again is fine, but not what the book says the roll is for. The roll is purely to see whether the action is ultimately successful or not. It doesn't measure the attempt or degree of success/failure. I wouldn't be upset at a game being run that way(so long as I decide how my PC thinks and acts), but it's not what it written for how to adjudicate ability checks. [/QUOTE]

Verification