NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8291501" data-attributes="member: 6704184">There are also biases regarding how we all run dnd and other games. In my group, the players can suggest alternate proficiencies to use to do a thing pretty freely, and as long as there is no glaring "that is nonsense" element, we just let it ride. What this helps allow is for a check with persuasion to mean something different than a check with insight, even though both are a roll to "influence someone". We let proficiency with Dragonchess stand in for a Tactics skill, alongside History, and Insight. That means you can use any of those three to add proficiency to a roll to analyse a situation tactically. So, when I ask a player what they do, and they decide to do what some games might call "read a bad situation", the results lean in different ways depending on what skill gets used. So, I will ask for a moderate (ie dc 15) Insight check, but the group knows I mean "a check to understand motives and predict behaviors", and that many proficiencies could apply. So, one character might roll an insight check, while another might roll "tactics" using history or dragonchess proficiency. In all cases it's just a wisdom or intelligence check with proficiency, using a standardized ladder of DCs. The difference comes in narrating results. Success on an Insight check tells you more about the people and their mental and emotional states, where a tactical analysis roll means you are studying positioning, apparent hierarchies, and comparing them to your knowledge of conflicts at the relevant scale. The reason I see this as promoting improvisation, and even see that being the case in a game where the DM isn't using the optional rules for using different proficiencies with a given ability check, is that the call and response is part of the system, but is looser than it is in any pbta game I've played, and isn't complicated with any other mechanics. It's just person to person interaction managed by very simple resolution mechanics that are open to interpretation. For me and nearly every gamer I know or have observed, interpretation on both sides of an interaction benefits improv, while highly mechanised and prescribed process diminishes it.</blockquote>

Verification