Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chimera" data-source="post: 1997146" data-attributes="member: 2002">Why does it have to be seen that way?I disagree with the philosophy that I need to studiously avoid having my PCs excel in areas where others dominate.  This doesn't mean I'm "competing" with them at all, nor do I see it as such when others match my skills.In one game I played in this last fall, the THREE of us who all had good Sense Motive skills all failed to notice something the Paladin, with the lowest SM of the bunch, picked up on.  Because the player rolled a 20.  Hey, I'm glad to have someone else at the table who can pick up where my character fails!!!  It isn't a sense of competition or jealously guarding my own little piece of turf.  It's a cooperative effort.And hey, if for some reason my character fails his diplomacy roll or somehow becomes disliked by the NPC we're trying to influence, I always welcome someone else who can pick up the pieces and make a second effort!The game I'm playing in now, there is another Rogue with almost the same skills as I have (at first level).  Neither of us has a problem with that.  We like the fact that we can both try our skills out and cover each other's backs.Again, it's not competition, it's not selfishly defending my small pile of turf.  It's about cooperation to reach goals.And insofar as Diplomacy and Charisma are concerned, I'm always in some sense the 1e player, looking at the "clear some land and create a Fief".  In 3e, maybe it's just about being more socially connected and having one's own NPC relationships.  I always see such skills and abilities as nothing but a benefit to the PC with such goals and would never begrudge my fellow player this kind of PC development.</blockquote>

Verification