|
A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. This shouldn't be controversial, but here we are, arguing that if you can't improv for a few minutes whenever you're told to, you don't deserve to be playing the game.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. they dont gotta describe exactly but I don't think just a vague intent of "I persuade them" suffices, but people may play as they like
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Farg posted:they dont gotta describe exactly but I don't think just a vague intent of "I persuade them" suffices, but people may play as they like Do you think a vague intent of "I climb the wall" suffices? How about "I forage for food" or "I look for traps"? Why is "I persuade them to x" different?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:Do you think a vague intent of "I climb the wall" suffices? How about "I forage for food" or "I look for traps"? Why is "I persuade them to x" different? talkings more important to the game
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. The difference between climbing a wall or combat and a social interaction like deception is different because the various ways one can climb a wall or swing a sword aren't going to impact the end goal, which is either climbing the wall or dealing your damage dice If you encounter a situation where you need to lie to get past a guard, the positive or negative outcomes can vary wildly depending specifically on how you go about it Do you... - Lie about being a guard here to take over the shift? - Try to seduce the guard? - Be a "concerned citizen" informing the guard of a shady character nearby? And the context also informs how these things impact the fiction. Are you trying to lie to get past a guard... - In broad daylight? - In the middle of the night? - During a battle? And there's various other miscellaneous contexts as well like are you... - In a costume, like dressed up as this person's boss? Or monarch? - In your full armor? - With an NPC or PC that would stand out in this town? More information than "I roll deception to lie to get us past" is needed to determine what happens next in the fiction. Asking someone how they do something isn't gatekeeping, it's the game
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
Farg posted:talkings more important to the game Is it? They spend a looot of book space telling you how to kill people and like, a paragraph telling you how to talk out your respective issues with them. Edit: Social stuff is like pretty much any other interaction in the game. Sometimes people say "I climb the wall" and roll a die, sometimes people colorfully describe climbing the wall. Sometimes people say "I try to persuade the guard" sometimes people go into more detail about what they want to say or what kind of approach they want to take. Not all dialogue is equal either. Maybe spend some game time with a player trying to argue with some noble to get their support in some endeavor and have a nice roleplaying scene. Maybe handwave someone haggling over the price of corn with a merchant. Glagha fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Mar 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Glagha posted:Is it? They spend a looot of book space telling you how to kill people and like, a paragraph telling you how to talk out your respective issues with them. ueah because people already know how to talk to people but they don't know how to cast magic missile
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
Farg posted:ueah because people already know how to talk to people but they don't know how to cast magic missile People know how to say words. Not everyone already knows how to be charming, intimidating, persuasive, or seductive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
like before I play the game I got syllables and poo poo down so I don't need the book to tell me that just tell me what dice to roll after I do it
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
How to cast Magic Missile: "I cast Magic Missile." How to be allowed to attempt a single Persuasion check: "For twelve years, you have been asking: who is John Galt?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Glagha posted:People know how to say words. Not everyone already knows how to be charming, intimidating, persuasive, or seductive. sure I'm not saying that if you don't arouse me the dm right now your roll auto fails but if you say "I roll to persuade" I'm going to ask "how are you persuading them", and if you can't muster even a basic idea of something someone might say to persuade someone then I dunno
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Are people playing games so fiction-lite that "I persuade the guard" with literally no other explanation for how they persuade them or what happens with the guard is a thing that happens?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Are people playing games so fiction-lite that "I persuade the guard" with literally no other explanation for how or what happens with the guard is a thing that happens? this is actually the core of my issue, I can't conceive of a game so abstracted
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
I mean if you want to take an obviously off the cuff example as an actual position go ahead and argue with that strawman.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
Farg posted:yes precisely, nailed it Besesoth posted:We don't need more lovely gatekeeping around the hobby. If you personally aren't willing to play with someone who's not quick-witted enough to come up with persuasive or deceptive rhetoric on the fly, and needs the separation of player and character that the rules are explicitly designed to enable, that sounds like a you problem, not a D&D problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Are people playing games so fiction-lite that "I persuade the guard" with literally no other explanation for how they persuade them or what happens with the guard is a thing that happens? Sometimes, yes. Here's an idea, if you're the DM and one of your players just wants to roll and see if their talking succeeds or fails, YOU describe what happens and how. That's something you can do - fill in story details that the players are light on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
Also shockingly roleplaying games are played by awkward nerds and people with legit social anxiety and you might have players who are deeply uncomfortable trying to play out a social interaction and might like to gloss over it a bit rather than try to do improv in front of their friends?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Sometimes, yes. hey man I'll tell them what the guard does all day but if someone can't or won't even come up with something as basic as "I try to persuade the guard that his shift is over early and I'm here to relieve him" or "there's a fight over there they need your help" then why did they show up to play a ttrpg
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
Glagha posted:I mean if you want to take an obviously off the cuff example as an actual position go ahead and argue with that strawman. Oh that wasn't rhetorical, I was really asking; that's a genuinely foreign concept to me in like 15 years of ttrpgs. Obviously people can play how they want!  thespaceinvader posted:Sometimes, yes. This is why I asked if people were really playing that exact example; it seems so extreme to me to be balking at the idea of asking a player "how do you want to persuade the guard?" Because the gradients for how the guard reacts to a failure or success vary wildly Like, the difference between failure being the guard reacting like "what? get the hell out of here you weirdo" and "...I'm calling for backup" Waffles Inc. fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:If you personally aren't willing to play with someone who's not quick-witted enough to come up with persuasive or deceptive rhetoric on the fly, and needs the separation of player and character that the rules are explicitly designed to enable, that sounds like a you problem, not a D&D problem. im not saying razzle dazzle me with incredible improv, just do more then point at the "persuasion +3" box on your sheet while grunting
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Oh that wasn't rhetorical, I was really asking; that's a genuinely foreign concept to me in like 15 years of ttrpgs. Obviously people can play how they want! No one does that. Like I said it's just an example of "someone not trying that hard to roleplay convincing someone of something" and was not intended to be a thing that actually occurs in that form at a table.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:The difference between climbing a wall or combat and a social interaction like deception is different because the various ways one can climb a wall or swing a sword aren't going to impact the end goal, which is either climbing the wall or dealing your damage dice You can make this same argument about literally any skill check. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise. Watch: If you encounter a situation where you need to climb a sheer wall, the positive or negative outcomes can vary wildly depending specifically on how you go about it Do you... - Use your ninja training to go up like spider man, spotting handholds and springing up from your toes? - Carefully hammer pitons and attach safety ropes as you go, with a friend belaying from below? - Say "gently caress it" and just freeclimb as fast as you can, ignoring your lack of training? And the context also informs how these things impact the fiction. Are you trying to climb the wall... - In broad daylight? - In the middle of the night? - During a battle? And there's various other miscellaneous contexts as well like are you... - With climbing gear? - In your full armor? - Trying to coach a newbie up in front of you? More information than "I roll to climb the wall" is needed to determine what happens next in the fiction. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
Farg posted:hey man I'll tell them what the guard does all day but if someone can't or won't even come up with something as basic as "I try to persuade the guard that his shift is over early and I'm here to relieve him" or "there's a fight over there they need your help" then why did they show up to play a ttrpg hey man I'll tell them what the kobold does all day but if someone can't or won't even come up with something as basic as "I try to cut off its hand so that it is unable to fight back" or "I'll wait for an ally to flank around and distract it so I can cut it in the nape of its neck easier" the why did they show up to play a ttrpg im not saying razzle dazzle me with incredible combat technique, just do more than point at the "to hit +3" box on your sheet while grunting
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
Farg posted:hey man I'll tell them what the guard does all day but if someone can't or won't even come up with something as basic as "I try to persuade the guard that his shift is over early and I'm here to relieve him" or "there's a fight over there they need your help" then why did they show up to play a ttrpg I think there's a disconnect here; for me the phrase 'I try to persuade the guard' by definition includes a context of what you're trying to persuade him. Even if it's just 'I try to persuade him to let us in'. But in short, I'd concur with earlier posters; if you'd allow 'I climb the wall' and 'I swing my sword', 'I persuade the guard to let us in' should also be fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:This is really good, guys. I assume you’re a nerd teacher training the next generation. I’d love a little breakdown of what kind of characters these kids made. Thanks! You guessed correctly I am the nerd teacher. In the past I have run board games or miniature wargames as an after school activity. Some kids keep their grades up so they can play sports, I figure there has to be a few kids that will make sure their grades are good enough so they can attend game club. The four that are playing DnD have never played before. I gave them each a sheet of general background question for their characters. We have played two sessions so far so they could get a real idea of how the game goes. They are going to give me their backgrounds before next time. As is there are a few ideas due to bonds/ideals but they are still learning how to “be” their characters when it comes to decision making. The party consists of 1. Dragonborn life cleric. Dragonborn are sort of the Ancient Greeks of my home brew campaign. The student is super pumped about mythology so they are a priest of Apollo. 2. Half elf beast ranger. Elves are more like Warhammer wood elves here. Her mother was a human but she was raised by her father who resented her being around. She spent most of her time alone in the forest thus the beast mastery. 3. Dwarf thief rogue. All I know about the background is that they have to steal in order to support a child they couldn’t take care of on their own. 4. Tiefling College of swords bard. Teiflings are from not-Egypt. She also hasn’t given me much background other than wanting to steal an amulet from another player. A fellow teacher is also playing as a battle master fighter to help me out with the group.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:hey man I'll tell them what the kobold does all day but if someone can't or won't even come up with something as basic as "I try to cut off its hand so that it is unable to fight back" or "I'll wait for an ally to flank around and distract it so I can cut it in the nape of its neck easier" the why did they show up to play a ttrpg no it's more like if they said "I cast a spell" but could not or would not say which spell
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
I'll just take the L here because like on some level I understand but at the same time, the back-to-back 'replace the words in posts with other combat action "equivalents"' just do not work for me and I don't want to seem like I'm trying to police how people play their games, so I guess based on everyone's reactions I really am in the minority here
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
I'm not policing poo poo people can and should play as they like but also I refuse to ever take the L and I'm objectively correct
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:16
|
|
|
Farg you are arguing against the strawiest of strawmen, literally a position no one holds. Knock it off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
Farg posted:no it's more like if they said "I cast a spell" but could not or would not say which spell That's a lie. State your intent: "I'm gonna hit that guy with a spell" Pick an appropriate ability: "Magic missile". Roll the dice to find out what happens: "6 damage". State your intent: "I'm gonna get the guard to let me by" Pick an appropriate ability: "Persuasion skill" Roll the dice to find out what happens: "I succeed". e: Just to be clear here, in my main group we quite literally do that second thing and then we improv the scene. Mechanics then roleplay. You're not doing the roleplay part in order to get a mechanical benefit, because roleplay is fun regardless. If I were playing with someone who couldn't/wouldn't do the roleplay, I'd be disappointed to miss that fun, but hey, same result. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:23
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. I think "explain what you want, that's fine," is an equally valid reason to minimize the skill checks in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
Deciding "What action do I take in combat?" and "What do I say to the Important NPC?" are, in my game, held as things I want my players to explicitly choose. Choosing them yourself, as a player, is core to the game that I'm running. You move your guys on the the grid, and you talk to people as your character. This does not mean that all actions taken by players are so delineated, and in my game, *how* you do that action in combat is not. It's specious to say "well if players have to do this one thing, why don't they have to do everything?" - games are allowed and are generally encouraged to be opinionated on what aspects of one's character are focused on. The truth is, it's not less valid to make a game where you do have to describe how you're hitting someone with your sword, I'm just less interested in running a game like that personally. I'm certainly not saying my way to play is The Only Way - do y'all assert that ttrpgs shouldn't ever ask players to contribute to a shared dialog as a particular character or is this about D&D specifically?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. I think the problem is the social skills are so badly done in d&d this is the worst possible option Choice a) player states intent and outlines argument to make, dm decides if it works, etc Choice b) all the above, but rolls a die that produces a number. The dm now arbitrarily makes up a number to beat, as well as a number for how good the argument was . Choice c) play a system with real social combat There's no reason to ever do B) Imagine the following comparison A) free form roleplay, describe how you kill the dragon. DM allows (ornot I guess) B) describe how you kill the dragon. Now you roll a d20. Did it happen??? C) actual super detailed rolling and math and stat block for the dragon. c) is how d&d actually works. As a side note, if your wisdom/int/charism are doing every mental action for you what exactly is left . Just have the DM play your char
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:Deciding "What action do I take in combat?" and "What do I say to the Important NPC?" are, in my game, held as things I want my players to explicitly choose. Choosing them yourself, as a player, is core to the game that I'm running. You move your guys on the the grid, and you talk to people as your character. This does not mean that all actions taken by players are so delineated, and in my game, *how* you do that action in combat is not. It's specious to say "well if players have to do this one thing, why don't they have to do everything?" - games are allowed and are generally encouraged to be opinionated on what aspects of one's character are focused on. The truth is, it's not less valid to make a game where you do have to describe how you're hitting someone with your sword, I'm just less interested in running a game like that personally. I'm certainly not saying my way to play is The Only Way - do y'all assert that ttrpgs shouldn't ever ask players to contribute to a shared dialog as a particular character or is this about D&D specifically? I think there are two things at work here. One is that... 'i persuade the guard to let us in' and persuading the king to let you have the kingdom or whatever... are different. Expecting people to put the same effort into random guard #4 and important NPCs is not necessarily reasonable, in just the same way as expecting the same level of engagement and description with random goblin mook #4, and a ten-session-long arc boss, is not necessarily reasonable. Two is that not every is good at actually speaking in character, and there shouldn't be any particular difference between narrating what your character does in general terms (I talk at length about the threat from the Grand Vizier) and actually saying what your character is saying. not everyone is *able* to do the latter well, on short notice, and improvised on demand. I know it's not one of my strengths, which is why if there's a big emotional beat that I have an idea might be coming in advance, i'll probably talk it through with the DM and work out a rough shape for the scene, in order to see if I can get there. What it boils down to for me, is unless you're going to force your players to dance on the table when they make a performance check, or fence with boffer swords to prove they can do combat... don't expect them to be able to play outside their skillset in order to play a character who doesn't match it in social situations, either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
yeah but the example put forth was someone just saying that they use a skill but refuse to give even the slightest bit of narrative as to how they do so
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I'm certainly not saying my way to play is The Only Way - do y'all assert that ttrpgs shouldn't ever ask players to contribute to a shared dialog as a particular character or is this about D&D specifically? I am specifically talking about D&D here in the D&D thread. I like pbta games a whole lot. In those games, if you're following the rules, there's no way to interact with the fiction without describing your character's actions. Yes, right down to what you're doing with your sword. I love that stuff. Some people here are kind of grafting that general philosophy onto only the social skills of D&D, which sucks for players who like D&D because they have a list of things their character can do and knowledge about how effective their character is at those things, and they want to think about the current scenario, look at that list of abilities, and say "I use ability X, I rolled Y, the result is Z". Because that's the core mechanic concept of D&D - State intent, choose ability, roll dice and see what happens. Nobody should be shocked when a player wants to apply that concept across the board. The game itself handles this for social skills as well as it handles any other skill check. Saying that players who want to engage with those mechanics the same as any other don't deserve to be playing a TTRPG, or acting confused about why they'd even want to play a TTRPG is gatekeep-y bullshit. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
i guess my thing is someone so inept or socially addled that they can't even think of a real basic way someone might conceivably go about persuading someone, even in the most abstract manner, is weird. unless it's like a disability or something then yeah ok
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 00:58
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I think there are two things at work here. mastershakeman put it much better than I did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
Farg posted:i guess my thing is someone so inept or socially addled that they can't even think of a real basic way someone might conceivably go about persuading someone, even in the most abstract manner, is weird. unless it's like a disability or something then yeah ok like to use the "describe how you attack" counter example from earlier, I'm not an expert sword fighter but if you asked me how I swung my sword at the goblin I could still go like "uhh I sidestep their blow and slash their right shoulder"
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
Farg posted:like to use the "describe how you attack" counter example from earlier, I'm not an expert sword fighter but if you asked me how I swung my sword at the goblin I could still go like "uhh I sidestep their blow and slash their right shoulder" Now apply the same logic as you're applying to social checks. Sidestep / right slash is the wrong answer. The goblin was only feinting the overhead blow to sucker you into the slash. He parries and ripostes, skewering you. You die. What do you mean hit points AC attack roll? Why should I care what those numbers are when you made bad wrong roleplay choices? Your character is a competent sword fighter? Should have played it like that then!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2019 01:13
|
|