Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retros_x" data-source="post: 9117533" data-attributes="member: 7033171">That was not was asked for.That was asked for. He wanted skills gone, not forcing players to do some amateur acting.Than you have a GM who is not good as that thing. And just saying, I dont mean: "do everything in theatre of the mind", just to get rid of the grid and fiddly 5' measurements. I use maps, I just don't want to chessboard the game. Simple, abstract maps so everybody understands how the environment is layouted and who is standing where are completely enough for most encounters.Its not. Defining how guard react and how alert procedures happen in a fortress is encounter / scenario design.I never said anything about using a single skill check. I just don't need minigames and subsystems. Its more mental load and its slows the game to a slog everytime. Bonus points if the GM forces you to do the minigame  because he prepared it, even if you don't want to or find a better solution e.g. casting Hold Person on the villain that tries to run away in a cinematic chase that the GM spend hours preparing.I'm sorry I had players on the spectrum at the table, but roleplaying is decision making, no matter what challenge is involved. An easy fix for your problem that I had lot of success with is offering help and choices. "Hey Tom, with your passive insight you realize that the king is quite proud of his golden palace. You could try to flatter him and praise his palace, you could threaten to burn it down or something else that comes to your mind to get from him what you want". If the players says like in your example "you already have the intent! Thats great, now ask for the method "Nice, how are you going to do that, play a ballad of your good deeds, call a witness to court or you have some different idea on your mind?" You can also ring other players in to help Tom to get ideas how to persuade the king.This btw is helping every player, no matter their condition. Keep in dialogue with your players, offer them options. But the most boring play IMO is "Can I roll persuasion" "yes" "20" "Ok, you persuaded the king *insert Matt Mercer 5 minute monologe until a player presses the next skill on their character sheet" (I am exaggerating to make my point clear).I think that was meant with "no skill checks, just roleplaying" at least thats what I am understanding.edit: Or to say it otherwise: Roleplaying is about decision making. If your players always look at their skills they make decisions between the always same 3-6 skills they are proficient with, some players might even consider the ones they are not proficient with. If you make decisions from the narrative like described above you will have indefinitely possibilties, thats sounds at least to me much more exciting. And your players are not dumb, they might've have ADHD, social anxiety or whatssoever but they are not dumb. They can deal with more options than the 3 same social skills over and over again.</blockquote>

Verification