|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:11AM
#1
|
|
|
Somebody can explain this? http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080201aDo they want to kill the ROLE play?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:19AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 21, 2004
|
Because your character abilities can be different than your own ? A 8 cha player should not try to play a cha 18 bard ? or should his character be limited by the player's shyness ?
And does a rule to handle social encounter prevents you from roleplaying ?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:25AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2004
|
A 8 cha player should not try to play a cha 18 bard ?
No, they shouldn't be. In my campaigns I've never let people play characters who they didnt try to RP their mental ability.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:26AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2007
|
Somebody can explain this?
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080201a
Do they want to kill the ROLE play?
Do you make your players prove to you that they can lift a car in real life before you let them do so in-game? If not, then allow your shy players to roleplay Bards and Sorcerers. This system makes sure that people aren't punished for their real-life short-comings.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:28AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2007
|
No, they shouldn't be. In my campaigns I've never let people play characters who they didnt try to RP their mental ability.
Punishing people for their shortcomings is about as horrible and elitist as you can get. It's also incredibly hypocritical when you only do it to the shy people.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:36AM
#6
|
|
|
I LOVE the threatical aspect of role play. It can be used to overcome the shiness. If you cut it off, the game became in a ROLLING Play instead.
Some times, in some sessions, you can forget about Diplomatic and Bluf skills, beacuse your role playing is perfect.
And this new version came because, people has many homebrew rules, should i add another one, to overcome this?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:52AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2007
|
I LOVE the threatical aspect of role play. It can be used to overcome the shiness. If you cut it off, the game became in a ROLLING Play instead.
Some times, in some sessions, you can forget about Diplomatic and Bluf skills, beacuse your role playing is perfect.
It has everything! Even the lack of rationality that self-claimed "roleplayers" (which everyone else knows as "drama queens") stereotypically are portrayed as having!
Roleplay and "Rollplay" are not mutually exclusive. They are not two ends opposite of a spectrum. And please do not use "rollplay" as a derogatory term.
Furthermore, punishing people for being shy and rewarding people for something that they put no effort into having is elitism at its worst. It not only makes you a bad player or DM, it makes you a bad person. I know people treat each other this way in this game, but I'm always as surprised and appalled when I'm faced with it.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:53AM
#8
|
|
|
My 2 cents.
This is supposed to be a role playing game not a pseudo miniatures game with elements of role playing in it.
If you want to simulate a characters ability to role play then make a base line “this is as good as your character can do” gauge. The old reaction table is fine but some form of limit to how well you can improve a person’s attitude toward a character is better than any iteration of “social combat”.
This is making me leery of what direction they are trying to take the “new” D&D.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 7:53AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2007
|
I watched the video response to the social combat question. I don't think Wizards is trying to kill role playing at all.
The great thing about a traditional RPG is that you can choose which rules you want to use. It's not like a MOG, in which you have to play by the rules coded into the program. I'd say if you don't like social combat, you are totally free to roleplay social situations as usual.
I could see myself using the social combat rules only in situations that directly affect the story or present some sort of dangerous or dramatic situation. Personally, I think social combat rules will be good for the game.
Also, you could choose to stick with v.1.0, v.2.0, v.3.0 or v.3.5 if you don't like the things that are changing in the new edition. Choice is why tabletop RPGs will always be better than online games.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2008 - 8:14AM
#10
|
|
|
It has everything! Even the lack of rationality that self-claimed "roleplayers" (which everyone else knows as "drama queens") stereotypically are portrayed as having!
Roleplay and "Rollplay" are not mutually exclusive. They are not two ends opposite of a spectrum. And please do not use "rollplay" as a derogatory term.
Furthermore, punishing people for being shy and rewarding people for something that they put no effort into having is elitism at its worst. It not only makes you a bad player or DM, it makes you a bad person. I know people treat each other this way in this game, but I'm always as surprised and appalled when I'm faced with it.
I have never punished any of my players in the 20+ years of running D&D games for being shy. I see it as if you (as a player) can do a good job at acting in the game but do not involve the other players in it (especially the shy players) you should be penalized for hogging the stage.
I do not tolerate “elitism” in my games nor would I ever promote it.
On the other hand I WOULD penalize a shy player under certain conditions. But a person would have to be doing all of the following for this to apply to them in my game.
1. If they are relying on mechanics as a crutch and if others have tried and are trying to involve a shy person and they refuse to even make an attempt.
2. If they constantly insist on playing high charisma characters but will not try to play them appropriately.
3. If through their lack of involvement they seriously detract from the other player’s enjoyment of the game over a course of several months.
I have NEVER had this happen as many of the “shy” players in my group have (eventually) become the best “drama queens” in our games.
Introducing the Social System into the game is fine as long as it is an optional system. There is no evidence that this system will be neither canon nor a permanent part of the game. Plus this is a role playing game and as such if the DM does not like it he does not have to use it in his game….
So I suggest to everyone, lighten up on this, it is not a big deal. If it gets the “Final Fantasy” generation into pencil and paper RPGs this can only be a good thing.
|
|
|
