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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zappo" data-source="post: 1542452" data-attributes="member: 633">I vaguely remember asking this on some other thread, but I was sleepy and can't remember which thread it was. Still, if the recent editions are '2000ed' and '3.11ed for workgroups', what does that say about the previous ones? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />  Let's talk about the social skill checks. Well, first of all, I wholeheartedly agree with Takyris - if the player can't Bluff, effectively preventing him from playing a character that can Bluff is unfair. Especially if the professional actor/writer sitting on the other side of the table is playing Krusk the 6 CHA half-orc barbarian and he is still allowed to successfully be the face of the party simply because social skill checks aren't used or are given massive modifiers based on "roleplaying".  Did you see the bold quotes in the last word? They are there for a good reason. In my opinion, using your own great social skills when playing Krusk is awful roleplaying. In fact, I think that's possibly another proof that powergaming and rollplaying aren't synonimous and can even be opposite. I would assign some serious XP penalties there (then again, I would never DM like that to begin with).  A good objection I've seen from JRRNeiklot:This is a good question. However, there are people who like playing but can't talk, and wondering why they like the game doesn't change the fact. The fundamental unfairness remains.  So, how do I deal with social checks? Answer: I run them by the book. Except for Diplomacy - not because I dislike the idea of having rules for it, but because I think the current rules don't work too well (they don't take circumstances into account, I fix this by using massive circumstance modifiers). But no, there are no modifiers for "good roleplaying", and if you want you can just say "Diplomacy on the guard, I rolled 21". My reasoning is:  1) I will not bribe my players into roleplaying. We're mature adults, and several of my players are older than me. I'm not going to teach them roleplaying with a carrot/stick system. Heck, I'm not going to teach them anything with any method. The games are for fun, if you learn something that's an added bonus.  2) Good roleplaying is its own reward. Most people on this thread seem to enjoy roleplaying. Do you expect a reward for doing something you enjoy? Neither do I. If I start a conversation with an NPC instead of just saying "I roll Diplomacy", it's because I like it, not because I want a +2. If you need to ask "then why starting the conversation at all?", I suggest you think long and hard about JRRNeiklot's quote above.  I do give XP rewards for Good Roleplaying - but I define Good Roleplaying as the ability to correctly portray your character, not as the ability to give speeches. Steal the spotlight for 15 minutes, and you get a penalty. Play Krusk as Churchill, and you get a penalty. This has nothing to do with speaking, or acting, or whatever; it's about the actions you make. If you have the ultracharismatic bard, I expect your character to be in the front lines of social warfare, even if you as a player couldn't speak in public to save your life. You have Diplomacy and Bluff ranks for that.  Now guess what? It works. People who like speaking with the NPCs do so, and do so very well. More often than not, I eventually have to call for a Diplomacy roll to push the story along and prevent the other PCs from getting bored. People who are in only for the combats can have their fun without being having to do chores. Everyone has fun and does what he wants to do. Newbies take some time to get into this mindset, but it invariably happens. Once the two principles I outlined above are firmly in place, the rest sort of falls into place. I wonder if the carrot/stick system of giving modifiers based on how well you speak does more harm than good in the long run. Seems to me that it encourages people to "roleplay" (quotes again) even when they don't want to, and in this way makes it harder for them to enjoy roleplaying in itself.</blockquote>

Verification