What happened to non-combat?

One thing I haven't seen too much talk of is the part of the game that encourages " thinking outside the box ". Anyone can roll dice for combat scenarios, and or pick the best spell/power/attack for killing the most monsters, who cares.

How about puzzles, riddles, traps and social encounters that aren't glazed over by a watered down d20 roll that says " ok, you figured out the puzzle" or my favorite " the king of the neighboring country has agreed to see you for a diplomatic chambers meeting. Upon arrival the king acknowledges your presence, your eyes meet for a moment ( enter die roll here, aha! your d20 roll was high enough) the king nods in agreement towards you, you bow and leave the chamber)

In short I think keeping things like secondary skills and non-weapon proficiencies ( or skills if you prefer ) need to remain in the game, but they need to take a more backseat role not to be used as a crutch or the lack of a certain skill should also not be a detriment to a character . It is a game of the imagination, if you can think of it, it stands to reason your character can try it. A player should participate in describing the details of desired action.
How about puzzles, riddles, traps and social encounters that aren't glazed over by a watered down d20 roll that says " ok, you figured out the puzzle" or my favorite " the king of the neighboring country has agreed to see you for a diplomatic chambers meeting. Upon arrival the king acknowledges your presence, your eyes meet for a moment ( enter die roll here, aha! your d20 roll was high enough) the king nods in agreement towards you, you bow and leave the chamber)


I'd hate to play in that game.

This isn't how people actually use those skills though, so you're busily hating a strawman.
This isn't how people actually use those skills though, so you're busily hating a strawman.



D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
How about puzzles, riddles, traps and social encounters that aren't glazed over by a watered down d20 roll that says " ok, you figured out the puzzle" or my favorite " the king of the neighboring country has agreed to see you for a diplomatic chambers meeting. Upon arrival the king acknowledges your presence, your eyes meet for a moment ( enter die roll here, aha! your d20 roll was high enough) the king nods in agreement towards you, you bow and leave the chamber)


I'd hate to play in that game.

This isn't how people actually use those skills though, so you're busily hating a strawman.




Yes i have seen it done that way. Simply to get past the "fluffy roleplaying" to get onto the "killing". The newer versions of the game almost steers players towards that method of play style simply for not giving xp bonuses to roleplaying ...and the abundance of xp is gained through killing monsters. I'm sure the major part of that onus lies squarely on the DM's shoulders ...but i know many a DM that simply reads the "rule book" and just goes through the motions the book says to do and more often in a rudimentry fashion. 
So, because some people ignored the rules that existed, the rules that did exist that many, many other people used weren't important?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
HA HA, TIME FOR Strawmen.
The newer versions of the game almost steers players towards that method of play style simply for not giving xp bonuses to roleplaying  


This would be funny for being flat wrong, if it weren't so busy being sad for being flat wrong.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
As a DM I enjoy the fact that the skills are there. Some of my players are excelent role players and for the most part I don't make them role skill checks for things they roleplay well. Last night, they roleplayed so well, they managed to amuse themselves in an inn for an hour and a half. (of real time) SInce they burnt up so much time with thier diolouges and drinking games I gave them the XP value of the combat encounter I cut out. (due to time contraints) 

Othe other hand I have some players who are horrible roleplayers. They can't come up with in character diolouge at the drop of the hat. They can't come up with a clever slight of hand to distract a mark. When I am a player and not a DM I can fall into this category on most nights. When they want to make thier character perform something they themselves can't do I turn it into a role of the dice. After all this game is about letting us do something that we couldn't do in this world. 
The newer versions of the game almost steers players towards that method of play style simply for not giving xp bonuses to roleplaying



By your pluralization, I assume you mean the WotC editions.

DMG, 3.0 Edition, Page 168, under the header "Variant: Story Awards" offers "Challenge Ratings for Noncombat Encounters", "Mission Goals", and "Roleplaying Awards".  Furthermore, it recommends eliminating or halving combat awards when using Story Awards.  The section takes up most of a two-page spread in the Dungeon Master's Guide, which one would expecte a Dungeon Master to read and follow according to the tenor of intended campaign.

"But it's a variant!"  Yeah, and it's also hard.  Awarding XP for Roleplaying, interaction, and other noncombat encounters is a variant because it is very hard to balance.  That is, you can't assign numbers to the gamut of possible noncombat but experience-worthy events like you can to combat encounters.  Each roleplaying event is unique and it's nearly impossible to provide rules for arbitrating them, especially determing what is worthy of what reward.  Combat, on the other hand, has numbers behind it, so a table can be generated for that.

If your groups use skills blindly, hide behind dice when presented with a lateral thinking puzzle (and are allowed to do so every time), and neither encourage nor reward Roleplaying, that is a problem with your groups.  3rd supported doing the opposite, and I'm sure someone will come along quickly enough to cite you chapter and verse on where 4th does the same.

"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."
On Worldbuilding - On Crafting Aliens - Pillars of Art and Flavor - Simulationism, Narritivism, and Gamism - Shub-Niggurath in D&D
THE COALITION WAR GAME -Phyrexian Chief Praetor
Round 1: (4-1-2, 1 kill)
Round 2: (16-8-2, 4 kills)
Round 3: (18-9-2, 1 kill)
Round 4: (22-10-0, 2 kills)
Round 5: (56-16-3, 9 kills)
Round 6: (8-7-1)

Last Edited by Ralph on blank, 1920

4e DMG, page 121: "XP for Non-Combat Encounters" gives brief guidelines for rewarding experience points for skill challenges, puzzles and traps.

4e DMG, page 122: "Quests" is an entire section about rewarding players with experience for reaching in-character goals.  The PHB, on page 258, even explains the idea to players and advises them to work with their DMs to come up with their own quests.

4e DMG2, page 25:  "You can give player characters experience rewards for time spent in dramatic scenes of interaction, as well as for their triumph over more traditional encounters. Award the characters experience as if they had defeated one monster of their level for every 15 minutes they spend in significant, focused roleplaying that advances the story ofyour campaign."

And I was going to cite the 3.5 ones, but Tevish beat me to it. 
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
4e DMG, page 121: "XP for Non-Combat Encounters" gives brief guidelines for rewarding experience points for skill challenges, puzzles and traps.

4e DMG, page 122: "Quests" is an entire section about rewarding players with experience for reaching in-character goals.  The PHB, on page 258, even explains the idea to players and advises them to work with their DMs to come up with their own quests.

4e DMG2, page 25:  "You can give player characters experience rewards for time spent in dramatic scenes of interaction, as well as for their triumph over more traditional encounters. Award the characters experience as if they had defeated one monster of their level for every 15 minutes they spend in significant, focused roleplaying that advances the story ofyour campaign."

And I was going to cite the 3.5 ones, but Tevish beat me to it. 




maybe i should have elaborated better instead of saying not, i should've stayed at saying "steers".....as in the 4e game itself makes the combats so long that really the most bulk of time to xp gain is in combat rather than outside of combat. Many of the optional rules or even the "whole 2 pages in 4e" just didn't feel like it gave the game competent justice to out of combat xp gaining. There, is that worded better? Listen, i've never ran 3e or 4e thats just what i've gotten from it from other DMs not counting less than 6....maybe it was just how they chose to run it. My bad, i apologize gentlemen. 


maybe i should have elaborated better instead of saying not, i should've stayed at saying "steers".....as in the 4e game itself makes the combats so long that really the most bulk of time to xp gain is in combat rather than outside of combat. Many of the optional rules or even the "whole 2 pages in 4e" just didn't feel like it gave the game competent justice to out of combat xp gaining. There, is that worded better?


That is, and sorry for instigating a pile of book quotes on you.  Still, it's kinda sad you haven't had a DM make good use of the tools presented.

Listen, i've never ran 3e or 4e thats just what i've gotten from it from other DMs not counting less than 6....maybe it was just how they chose to run it. My bad, i apologize gentlemen. 


It was.  Well, it was either how they chose to run it, or them not realizing the potential of the tools in the book.  The last 4e campaign I ran, I tracked XP sources, along with a few other things, just for kicks, and found that the party got only about a third of their experience from combat.  The rest came from quests and skill challenges(I don't tend to use a lot of traps or puzzles).  The focus switches away from combat relatively easily if the DM wants it to.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
One thing I haven't seen too much talk of is the part of the game that encourages " thinking outside the box ". Anyone can roll dice for combat scenarios, and or pick the best spell/power/attack for killing the most monsters, who cares. How about puzzles, riddles, traps and social encounters that aren't glazed over by a watered down d20 roll that says " ok, you figured out the puzzle" or my favorite " the king of the neighboring country has agreed to see you for a diplomatic chambers meeting. Upon arrival the king acknowledges your presence, your eyes meet for a moment ( enter die roll here, aha! your d20 roll was high enough) the king nods in agreement towards you, you bow and leave the chamber) In short I think keeping things like secondary skills and non-weapon proficiencies ( or skills if you prefer ) need to remain in the game, but they need to take a more backseat role not to be used as a crutch or the lack of a certain skill should also not be a detriment to a character . It is a game of the imagination, if you can think of it, it stands to reason your character can try it. A player should participate in describing the details of desired action.



there is a difference between challenging the character and challenging the player.

puzzles and riddles are purely metagame... historically speaking, D&D has had very little mechanics in regards of character ability (beyond plot buster-esque spells and the like that simply bypass the situation rather then attempt to resolve it) to solve these outside of a "roll INT/knowledge/wisdom/etc..." roll. they take the player outside of game currently in play and make him use his own abilities.

traps are usually solved in one of two ways: in-character or out of character. like puzzles and riddles, in-character resolution of these are usually a bypass via spell/effect or binary succeed/fail via dice roll.

out of character resolution is akin to the gaming term "pixelbitching", where it refers to early graphic adventure games in which the player must click on a particular pixel to discover clues and items. this could be a real pain in the higher resolution ones where you pixel (or small clump of them) is rather small on the screen. in TTRPG parlance, it's the old "i poke every brick with a 10ft pole, pull every book from the shelf, twist every torch holder, fiddle around with the inside of the fireplace, lift every rug/desk/armoire/bookshelf and check under/behind it, etc... do i find the secret door" basically when you start relying more on a player's ability to say the right combination of words to remove the trap as opposed to the character's ability to do so.

as for diplomatic relations and somesuch, i'll tell you right now, i'm not nearly as well-spoken as some of my PCs and i'm not a failed shakespearean actor. if you're going to require me to talk word-for-word in character to get my point across, expect to try to shank the GM with my swiss army knife hoping to score a crit.

who do you want to challenge in an RPG? the player or the character? if i wanted my skills as a player to be challenged primarily, i'd simply play a videogame.
exp by gold man, I'd love to play a game of D&D with that in mind.


LOOK AT THAT HUGE PILE OF EXP THE DRAGON'S KNEELING ON


There is a middle way with respect to the in-character roleplaying vs. out-of-character skill check. When a player rolls a skill check for diplomacy, as a proxy for roleplaying, the DM can ask something like, whats your angle? The player doesn't have to create dialogue word for word, but just a general idea. Lincoln at Gettysburg would say, "I appeal to our common history" instead of, "Fourscore and seven years ago..." No matter what the rules system is a lot of players need a push like that. The reward system for noncombat encounters isn't that much of a help IMO, and thats not a 3e or 4e problem. The problem with XP rewards for RP is that players know that XP primarily comes from monsters; most players will forgo the extra XP for roleplaying when they're uncomfortable in character. Sometimes this is because players have no interest in RP and sometimes its because they haven't gotten a handle on their character yet. If the latter is the case you can try RP encounters that are less dramatic or consequential. Or, if your players aren't too touchy, you can try something that is provokative at a more base level, something they'll react to reflexively. Have a minor NPC give them a task, when they return for the promised reward have the minor NPC stiff them or shortchange them. But, do it in character. "Excellent news, you have my gratitude." NPC walks away. players:"WHAT?" taverngoers go silent, NPC turns back, "Why, is something wrong?" player:"you said we'd get 500 gold for that!" NPC, "I think I would remember a promise like that. Are you calling me a liar?" at this point you could cue them to give you an intimidate check. they're already roleplaying so the check is part of the encounter rather than the entire thing. Check success, "Actually, I do remember something about a reward now, what do you say to 200 gold?" Check fail, some of the taverngoers stand up from their tables and move toward the PCs, NPC, "looks like we have some troublemakers here boys." This kind of thing doesn't challenge the players to search their imaginary character for complex emotions or initiate anything on their own. It uses a basic situation to give them a chance to decide how their character reacts, helps them flesh out their PC. It may be that their character reacts the same way they themselves would but, that can still be roleplaying. Note, when you're describing the tavern you may want to mention a sign that says something like NO SWORDPLAY. It might help avoid the unpleasantness of having PCs arrested for murder rather than simply knocking some people out in a barfight. Speaking of environment, if you feel your group would like RP encounters but has trouble getting into them you might have to play around with the descriptions. Different things do it for different players, some are drawn in by descriptions of people, others respond more to descriptions of smells (no joke).
Sorry so long. My point is that RP problems usually aren't the fault of rules.
How about the fact that a high level bard with a 20 something charisma is far more convincing than most players are in real life, a skilled thief who has disarmed hundreds of traps has much more knowledge than the player playing him on the various types of traps and how to disarm the, or the learned sage who has poured over countless tomes on history and lore will be much better at riddles and puzzels then the person playing him.

The mechanic for rolling in all those situations is important to have in the game, it lets the introvert play the dashing swashbuckler and the guy who got poor marks in school be the brilliant mage.

If you take those away then combat mechanics are the only mechanics that matter, because players will just make combat gods and the ones good at puzzles will solve them even though the character has a low INT and no knowledge skills, or the charismatic guy in real life will be the face of the party with a character that could never be.

Remember this is a public forum where people express their opinions assume there is a “In my humble opinion” in front of every post especially mine.  

 

Things you should check out because they are cool, like bow-ties and fezzes.

https://app.roll20.net/home  Roll20 great free virtual table top so you can play with old friends who are far away.

http://donjon.bin.sh/  Donjon has random treasure, maps, pick pocket results, etc.. for every edition of D&D.

How about the fact that a high level bard with a 20 something charisma is far more convincing than most players are in real life, a skilled thief who has disarmed hundreds of traps has much more knowledge than the player playing him on the various types of traps and how to disarm the, or the learned sage who has poured over countless tomes on history and lore will be much better at riddles and puzzels then the person playing him.

The mechanic for rolling in all those situations is important to have in the game, it lets the introvert play the dashing swashbuckler and the guy who got poor marks in school be the brilliant mage.

If you take those away then combat mechanics are the only mechanics that matter, because players will just make combat gods and the ones good at puzzles will solve them even though the character has a low INT and no knowledge skills, or the charismatic guy in real life will be the face of the party with a character that could never be.



These are good points. I don't think too many people would argue with them. The only thing I would add is that while those skills allow a player to have a PC with a different skillset than their own they don't have to completely replace roleplaying. They actually can support great roleplaying. There needs to be good info in the DMG about combining skill-checks with good roleplaying and helping the DM make non-combat encounters more exciting and accessible all players.
When you roleplay you always are playing in and out of character.

Why some of you consider unacceptable playing out of character with riddles, traps or social and not with combat? If you have a skill that is "Disable traps", "Riddles" or "Diplomacy" you can have a skill that is "Tactics", roll a die and decide if you win or lose the combat.

You can spend 3 hours moving your miniature and you can not spend 1 minute solving a riddle. Really nice, guys!

EDIT: Misspelling.

Hrm... I've given a lot of though on this matter. I think that as much information should be given on teaching players and DMs how to role-play as they do with combat rules and mechanics. I saw a few references to pages in 3e and 4e but not a whole lot is there. D&D started back when cable TV had only been available to most people for 3 years and the internet was decades away. The most common forms of entertainment for the 70's nerd were books, comic books, and Playboy. The early D&D nerd still had a solid foundation in being able to imagine events that were explained to them either by a story from a book or their DM. As technology grew, internet became available, books and imagination became less needed as sources of entertainment. D&D evolved to promote the use of figurines and combat grids instead of telling the story of how an encounter unfolded with the aid of dice. Now we have a generation of nerds that have grown up on 1040i resolution Skyrim, World of Warcraft, and things on the internet that would make putting Playboys in elementary schools reasonable.


The new nerd doesn't have to imagine anything. Doesn't have to wait till next month for a new edition of their favorite super hero comic to come out. They're all over forums QQ about how what they want isn't out yet (I'm looking at you Diablo III community). They want to be able to roll dice, kill bad guys, and collect loot. Story be damned.


D&D Next should not cater to these people out of principle, there should be a lot devoted on how to Role Play. It's a lost art that needs to be brought back.

One thing I haven't seen too much talk of is the part of the game that encourages " thinking outside the box ". Anyone can roll dice for combat scenarios, and or pick the best spell/power/attack for killing the most monsters, who cares. How about puzzles, riddles, traps and social encounters that aren't glazed over by a watered down d20 roll that says " ok, you figured out the puzzle" or my favorite " the king of the neighboring country has agreed to see you for a diplomatic chambers meeting. Upon arrival the king acknowledges your presence, your eyes meet for a moment ( enter die roll here, aha! your d20 roll was high enough) the king nods in agreement towards you, you bow and leave the chamber) In short I think keeping things like secondary skills and non-weapon proficiencies ( or skills if you prefer ) need to remain in the game, but they need to take a more backseat role not to be used as a crutch or the lack of a certain skill should also not be a detriment to a character . It is a game of the imagination, if you can think of it, it stands to reason your character can try it. A player should participate in describing the details of desired action.




I guess if this is true for you and your group you need to either deal with it in that setting or find another group. 

I have never in all of the time I've played in or run a game have I used some die roll to replace player interaction with the npcs or the game world. 

I like trying to challenge the players at my table with riddles, puzzles, and difficult negotiations. Sure if the players are having trouble I will allow the use of dice or give them the benefit of a high ability score to overcome a situation if they really want that kind of help, but it's a role playing game and as such the player needs to be afforded the chance to play the role they chose when they designed their character.  


I guess in groups where the game is being played by teens who are teaching themselves the art of role playing this is going to happen. I can't say with any certainty that the game itself is to blame since I learned to play using rules from the dark ages. I read my dungeon masters guide like some people read their favorite novels, and read other materials to glean the most information about the hobby I found fascinating. For me D&D was never a combat simulation. The fighting was fun but sitting behind the screen being everyone else in the world was better. I also loved the world building and all of the stuff that comes with it.

 
roleplay isn't a lost art, it's one the old guard is just too firmly entrenched in to realise it's evolving.

you're right that imagination is less needed as a source of entertainment but the media they are exposed to allows them to be immersed in far more then the standard local fare.

indeed, if i wanted to i could watch a french-canadian independant film one hour then immerse myself in some independantly subbed wuxia film, watch a few episodes of Batman the Animated series and finish it off with some shounen slop to kill a few braincells for kicks.

and that's using only video as a medium.

for videogames i could play Skyrim, Arkham City, Saint's Row and GTA and get quite a wide array of different experiences and characters.

kids nowadays aren't forced to use their imaginations to have fun, but i've yet to see one sit down and told to pretend he's a fictional character and wind up with a blank slate.
It's rather nice that this sort of thread came up, because in my game, my player's just recently levelled from 3 to 4....without a single fight the entire level, and with only a handful of die rolls. Oh, and I didn't just tell them to level when I felt like it. Every time the party uncovered a piece of information, convinced someone, or whatever, they got XP. A little bit, sure, but XP nonetheless.

The amount of things they needed to do was based off of the Skill Challenge's XP rewards, but rather than require every reward to be gained from a roll, I allowed sufficient roleplaying to "count" as a successful check, but only if they couched their arguments or whatever in terms the NPC would accept.

Was the level entierly dice-free? Of course not. Stuff like stealth checks, perception checks, checks for Forensics, knowledge of the Brelish legal code, and the like still needed a d20 roll, but hey, that's what they're there for.

My group still had a blast with this utterly non-combat level. Sure, level 4 will have some action scenes (the party is currently trapped inside a burning building), but you have to mix it up.

Nevertheless, the OPs original post is, as many have noted, a strawman. All you need to do to have fun is.....roll with it. Be flexible in thought. Say, "Yes," or "Yes, but..." or "Yes, and..." to your players, and.....roleplay. 

Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid

Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade.

"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,

"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling

 

Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!

 

57019168 wrote:
I am a hero, not a chump.
I would agree this is a non-issue from a mechanincal standpoint. RP problems don't come down to problems with the rules. But, that doesn't mean its a non-issue at every table. I don't get to be a player very often, but I've sat as a player for a few new DMs and this is one of the harder things for new DMs to get ahold of. So, I don't think the dev team can address this by changing the skills tree or anything like that. The DM guide could do a lot more than it does to help the new DM with this stuff. WotC usually has several seminars at GenCon just about DMing. Maybe they could set one up to discuss content for the new DMG.
How about the fact that a high level bard with a 20 something charisma is far more convincing than most players are in real life, a skilled thief who has disarmed hundreds of traps has much more knowledge than the player playing him on the various types of traps and how to disarm the, or the learned sage who has poured over countless tomes on history and lore will be much better at riddles and puzzels then the person playing him.

The mechanic for rolling in all those situations is important to have in the game, it lets the introvert play the dashing swashbuckler and the guy who got poor marks in school be the brilliant mage.

If you take those away then combat mechanics are the only mechanics that matter, because players will just make combat gods and the ones good at puzzles will solve them even though the character has a low INT and no knowledge skills, or the charismatic guy in real life will be the face of the party with a character that could never be.




(sigh....)  You don't get it.  The dice rolls aren't being taken away. 

What's being asked for is just a more detailed description of what your characters doing/saying. 
It doesn't really matter if you do this in 1st or 3rd person terms.  Or even if you're particularly good at it.  What matters is that you try & paint a mental picture of the action for those listning.       
What's being asked for is just a more detailed description of what your characters doing/saying. 
It doesn't really matter if you do this in 1st or 3rd person terms.  Or even if you're particularly good at it.  What matters is that you try & paint a mental picture of the action for those listning.       


So how is that different from what most people already do and what has been done in pretty much every edition of the game?
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls. God of ownership and possession.
because D&D has now put on it's rimmed glasses, trucker hat, bought it's clothes at the local 2nd hand store and is trying to call itself art. there's also probably an umlaut in the word art.

you've probably never heard of it though.
because D&D has now put on it's rimmed glasses, trucker hat, bought it's clothes at the local 2nd hand store and is trying to call itself art. there's also probably an umlaut in the word art.

you've probably never heard of it though.




Is this really constructive? You couldn't pull anything out of this thread to say something constructive about?

Some think RP is more important, some less. Some have more trouble working with RP encounters and skill challenges etc than others. There is more than one way to play.
you can't force anybody to RP, though. best case scenario you get people running through a list of "this is what the gm needs" and it generally seems to feel quite forced and unnatural.

secondly, the more you make a player's skill at having a silver tongue matter the less you're challenging the character. more imporantly you're also penalizing the shy people, those with speech impediments, those who have the  group's primary language as their second or third, etc...

not everyone is a shakespearean actor. the absolute baseline required RP should be "X does Y". for the most part, i see in-game RP being rewarded with in-game benefits. the more you interact with the game world, the more it interacts back with you. if you go out of your way to befriend NPCs, help the local lords and build orphanariums for the orclings who's parents you unceremoniously killed, then the setting will naturally tend to respond in kind.

but to have a "you must be this RP to play"? no thank you.
you can't force anybody to RP, though. best case scenario you get people running through a list of "this is what the gm needs" and it generally seems to feel quite forced and unnatural.



Some groups have great RP. Some want to have it but the DM has trouble facilitating it. Some don't want it at all. No one has advocated forcing anyone to adopt either style.


secondly, the more you make a player's skill at having a silver tongue matter the less you're challenging the character. more imporantly you're also penalizing the shy people, those with speech impediments, those who have the  group's primary language as their second or third, etc...



IMO the skills system provides a range of ways to do both at once. It doesn't have to be one or the other. I simply hope that the DMG helps new DMs learn to foster the type of play they and their players want.


not everyone is a shakespearean actor. the absolute baseline required RP should be "X does Y". for the most part, i see in-game RP being rewarded with in-game benefits. the more you interact with the game world, the more it interacts back with you. if you go out of your way to befriend NPCs, help the local lords and build orphanariums for the orclings who's parents you unceremoniously killed, then the setting will naturally tend to respond in kind.



I totally agree. I find that players who enjoy in-character RP like those rewards better anyway and they lead to more RP opportunities. giving xp for them doesn't make much sense to me.


but to have a "you must be this RP to play"? no thank you.



I don't think anyone is saying that. but, is it too much to ask a player to have a general idea of what they want to accomplish through a diplomacy or bluff check? Should a player say something like, I start a friendly convo with the guard and invite him to quit his shift early and go get drunk with us. instead of simply I roll a diplomacy check or talking it out word for word. I suppose that is up to each group to decide. The DMG should offer several different ways to handle the balance between skill check and RP IMO.


4e DMG, page 121: "XP for Non-Combat Encounters" gives brief guidelines for rewarding experience points for skill challenges, puzzles and traps.

4e DMG, page 122: "Quests" is an entire section about rewarding players with experience for reaching in-character goals.  The PHB, on page 258, even explains the idea to players and advises them to work with their DMs to come up with their own quests.

4e DMG2, page 25:  "You can give player characters experience rewards for time spent in dramatic scenes of interaction, as well as for their triumph over more traditional encounters. Award the characters experience as if they had defeated one monster of their level for every 15 minutes they spend in significant, focused roleplaying that advances the story ofyour campaign."

And I was going to cite the 3.5 ones, but Tevish beat me to it. 




maybe i should have elaborated better instead of saying not, i should've stayed at saying "steers".....as in the 4e game itself makes the combats so long that really the most bulk of time to xp gain is in combat rather than outside of combat. Many of the optional rules or even the "whole 2 pages in 4e" just didn't feel like it gave the game competent justice to out of combat xp gaining. There, is that worded better? Listen, i've never ran 3e or 4e thats just what i've gotten from it from other DMs not counting less than 6....maybe it was just how they chose to run it. My bad, i apologize gentlemen. 



our 4th combats last around as long as our 3rd edition combats.
and the ratio of roleplat to encounters is the same.

2nd edition encounters tended to be shorter becouse the combat system was so bland
( exept for the powerfull spells that would end a encounter in 1 or 2 rounds)
that you wanted to get combat over with as fast as possible as it just wasen't a fun part of the game.