|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 12:41PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
May 17, 2003
|
No, they shouldn't be. In my campaigns I've never let people play characters who they didnt try to RP their mental ability.
For the purposes of understanding what you say I'm going to reiterate what I think you said:
(1) You said, that people who make a character concept, but they fail to even attempt to roleplay it, are not allowed to have that concept. For example someone who has an 18 charisma who attempts to roleplay the charisma, but fails to do it properly, is not limited, but the person who makes an 18 charisma person who then acts like a 4 charisma person and then says "Oh, but I'm 18 charisma so I can convince him regardless of farting in his face, insulting him, his family, his heritage, his race, and his existence all in one sentence." At least try to roleplay. If you're just trying to use your stats to ruin immersion, then I'm not going to let you do it.
(2) Otherwise we get to the point of where most of us should all play 10 str, 10 dex, 10 con, 10 int, 10 wis, 10 cha characters right? Because I don't know what a 20 str character should do, so why should I play one? But I know what i can do with my 10 str, so I can tell you want my character does.
If you mean it like I interpreted the first paragraph, then I agree, but if you mean it more towards the second, I wholeheartedly disagree.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 12:46PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2004
|
Dingdingdingding! Give this man a prize!
I'll take the new car, so long as it comes with the elf beauty you got showing it off, Bob!
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 12:52PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2004
|
I think a 'social encounter' system and role-playing can co-exist quite nicely. the old James Bond 007 rpg had a nice system for that sort of thing and I found that it actually encouraged role-playing among my players, even the more munchkiny types. This was done by my simply asking them to play it out as best they could before any dice were rolled. Even abstaraccting it out was okay ("Okay, I tell the guard a BS story about how I am a Nuclear Weapons Inspector"), if I thought that was the most they do. After doing that a while, even the players who were less adept at role-playing would at least give it a real try, because they weren't being penalized for not having those skills IRL.
So I think a social encounter system is a good thing, not a detriment to role-playing.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 1:12PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2007
|
While it its being elitist its not hypocritical.
It is, actually. A player that is nothing but skin and bones is allowed to play a heavily muscled warrior, but a shy one isn't allowed to play a diplomat. That's a double standard right there.
I simply require that players portray their characters in line with the characters mental abilities, not their own. If they are unable to do this than they cant play that character. I dont let someone who has Int and Wis 8 come up with brilliant plans, I also stop characters with Int and Wis 16 before they make dumb mistakes.
See, that's you realizing certain flaws of the systemwhen dealing with intelligence and common sense of the players, but you still expect shy players to be outspoken during play. It's not fair to put that kind of pressure on someone trying to have fun and escape reality with his friends for one evening. I've dealt with shy players before and made the mistake of penalizing them for stuttering and sweating and ending up asking if he couldn't just roll the dice. Honestly, I felt like utter crap after that and apologized the next day for doing that to him.
What ViolenceInTheMedia said is true. The system already does this mechanically so whats the big deal applying it to roleplaying?
Because just because there's one flaw doesn't make it okay to make everything else flawed too.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 1:12PM
#25
|
|
|
The designers know that many players like to keep their social interactions as dice-free as possible. So I expect to see a variant social enounter rule in the DMG that caters to the "all-talk" crowd, unless the system is flexible enough in itself to do this already.
Social encounter rules are useful for those situations where the DM doesn't automatically know what's going to happen. Such situations should have a chance of success or failure for the PCs (yes, I know that success or failure is often more on a continuum than two distinct states). If everything's left up to roleplaying, a tableful of brilliantly articulate players will 'always win' while a table of awkward, shy players will keep missing out.
What I want the social encounter system to be is one which lets the whole party take part, not just the guy with the highest Diplomacy. I'd like it to be one where the path towards convincing the NPCs to give the PCs what they want is sometimes far from straightforward, requiring thought and resourcefulness.
As for roleplaying, I like that to happen naturally. I'd rather not have players who do 'tick the boxes' roleplaying in order to ensure they get all possible in-game benefits. So in my games, an uncharismatic player can have their PC operate at high charisma if they put in a bit of enthusiasm, and if the intention of their actions is in line with what a high-Charisma PC would be doing. For example, a player whose PC is trying to flatter the duke may say lots of cliches, but I can imagine that the PC is using far more polished phrases.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 1:34PM
#26
|
|
|
I'm thinking the knee-jerk fear of opponents of 'social combat' systems is that leaving things up to the dice will reduce roleplaying encounters to "I use Diplomacy on the guard" or "I use Bluff", with no further elaboration (like certain unimaginative players reducing combat actions to "I attack the orc".)
The thing is, just because the dice are there doesn't mean the roleplaying element will (or should) be tuned out. Just have the players act out the scene, and don't penalize them if they give it an honest try despite their poor real-life social skills. Then let the dice decide the NPC's reaction(maybe even add a bonus to the roll if the PC's argument was convincing enough).
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 2:05PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jan 16, 2006
|
Sometimes having a rule for something gives you an idea of how to describe it that you wouldn't normally come up with. In my case whether or not social combat rules are used at the table wouldn't matter so long as I had them to give me a kind of instruction for something which I don't entirely understand in real life.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 5:04PM
#28
|
|
|
Roleplaying is about making decisions based on what the character would do in a given situation.
Rules determine what happens after the decision is made.
Storytelling provides a context to the decisions made through roleplaying and the outcome determined by the rules.
Acting is something best left to professionals.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 5:16PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2005
|
Somebody can explain this?
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080201a
Do they want to kill the ROLE play?
I'm glad they have social rules for the new edition. It's nice to see that the designers acknowledge that there's more to D&D than combat.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 6:49PM
#30
|
|
|
Actually, this could encourage roleplaying. Imagine if you will.
Player "A" (Charismatic Cleric): I believe we should talk to the goblins. There is no shame in negotiating with a foe we cannot hope to deafeat. If we are kille here, who will save the hostages. The innocent villagers should be where our concern lies...
Player "Moron" (Dimwitted Fighter whose player only cares about combat): Shut up stupid (Player "Moron" to DM: I shoot the goblin king. No we can stop all the boring talking.)
So, you see that ignoring the social abilities of characters tends to shaft the players that care about such things.
Note that I haven't read all the posts. The two players described are from a group I used to game with and are not meant to symbolize anyone on this thread. Please remove this post if the tone is too hostile...
|
|
|
