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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1544690" data-attributes="member: 5171">Odd.  I've noticed the opposite.  The rules have given some of my players who would ordinarily stick with fighters or quiet clerics the chance to play bards or socially strong rogues, and they've grown more confident with roleplaying through doing so.And, if we're going for anecdotal evidence, then I should also note that one of my players was the son of God, and he said to me, "Wow, the social skill system of the d20 system doesn't discourage roleplaying!"  So I believe I win the anecdotal evidence war, because really, what trumps the son of God as far as anecdotal evidence?(By the way, if the son of God wants to play in your campaign, avoid comments about clerics being too powerful...)Of course, Storyteller has rules for social activities that are just as laid-out as the social rules in D&D.  In Storyteller, however, the GM is officially directed to lay out the story with the use of social skills to bypass certain obstacles in mind.  If you look through the 3E DMG, I believe you'll find sections about letting social skills bypass combat-planned encounters, and getting good XP and everything.  DMs starting D&D with 3E might well look at that and plan better, more social-skill-friendly adventures than the DMs who've been playing since OD&D and know that D&D is about finding ugly monsters, killing them, and taking their stuff.  The official use of social skills as a mechanism that can alter situation might well be a powerful step forward for social skills, making them officially part of the game and making it officially a good idea to make situations that are best resolved through said skills, just as a good DM wants to make certain situations that are best resolved by Hide checks (or Invisibility spells), Climb checks (or levitate spells), or Open Lock checks (or Fireball... er... Knock spells).  A good DM, by the rules as bloody written, makes social skills, and the attendant roleplay element, not only allowable in the game, but essential to the adventure*.* If that's the kind of adventure that DM and his players want to run.  Some groups want low combat and lots of roleplaying.  Some want lots of skill checks.  Some want lots of combat.  Some want lots of overland travel and description.  Some want to just teleport to the next plot bit.  There's nothing wrong with a DM who says "screw social skills, this is gonna be a fight-a-thon", unless he doesn't make it clear to his players that he's running a fight-a-thon, and unless he doesn't listen to what his group wants before deciding upon a fight-a-thon campaign.Actually, yes, you can.  There's nothing in those two statements that is directly contradictory.  A player who is not an experienced roleplayer can use the social skills as a stepping stone, but the system of balanced and open enough that a strong roleplayer will only be hampered by it if he tries to play a character without the skill ranks he's trying to convey -- that is to say, if said roleplayer is trying to be a stinking munchkin.Believe me, I've watched an amazingly charismatic player smile at me and then say something hilariously stupid and unflattering because his character had a Charisma of 10.  When he wants to play a smooth-talking social powerhouse, he plays a bard or rogue and goes to town, and he is truly scary to behold.My group doesn't -- well, I correct myself; my group needs no rewards beyond the "solving encounters through communication and social skills" stuff that's, y'know, written right there in the DMG, in which the party gets XP for getting past an encounter and doesn't lose hit points, spell slots, or item charges in the process.  Or do you want XP for roleplaying stuff that actually doesn't affect the game?  You want extra bonus XP for talking in character?  Why is your group so hung up on getting rewards?  Sounds kinda like rollplaying disguised as roleplaying, since we're getting so comfortable slinging these derogatory terms around.  "Sure, we want to delve deep into our characters' psyches, provided we get XP for doing so."  I mean, really.</blockquote>

Verification