but...

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Lazarus at 2003-10-16 19:13:07
Converted from Phorums BB System

Roleplaying is generally "in character". The extension of that is that while the player may know how to hotwire cars, for example, the character doesn't unless (s)he's got the "hotwire cars" skill.

I'm unsure about the impact on social skills for the character, but it doesn't seem fair to base the whole thing on how well the player did IN A GAME WITH THE SKILLS. In a game that doesn't have the skills, it obviously depends on the roleplaying.

Now, if we have roleplaying bonuses for in character dialogue, perhaps it could be put to a Secret Ballot whether and how much the character gets for bonus?

Laz

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Rob Carriere at 2003-10-17 04:54:19
Converted from Phorums BB System

[First: I'm a rules-light person. That bias is going to show in this response. Your milage and so on.]

The problem I see with the ballot (and other, similar ideas) is that it completely interupts the flow of the game. Grinding halt while we vote, restart and everybody needs to get back in character.

My usual take on this is that there are two potential problem cases: highly skilled player has low-skilled character and vice-versa. The other two cases will work out almost no matter what you do.

The highly-skilled player who uses more skill than the character has is, at least among the groups I hang with, usually responsive to a GM remark that he's playing out of character. Problem solved.

With the lesser-skilled player, I listen to the player for the angle taken and then imagine that executed with the character's skill level. If I feel someone with the right skill would have taken another angle, I look confused and ask a leading question. This way, the player is still in control, but the skill does take effect.

As for the `blew the only skill roll for the session' problem, I never roll/have the player roll unless,
- The player asks,
- I feel it helps the atmosphere,
- The player is running the character at the edge of his skill,
- A fight breaks out.
I usually define `at the edge of his skill' as `an average roll would be a failure', so for example in D20 a take-10 would fail.

SR
--

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by WerewolfPaladin at 2003-10-17 07:27:47
Converted from Phorums BB System

The problem with the approach of visualizing it with the character's skill is that sometimes you get a player that has very little in the way of diplomatic ability who's playing a high diplomacy type character. In the process of negotiation, they say or do something that can't possibly be saved in anyone's eyes (like inadvertenly through lack of skill delivering a massive insult to the person you're talking to), so there are some situations where personal skill in a social situation has to count.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by bob the fighter at 2003-10-17 11:20:28
Converted from Phorums BB System

there are two problems with figuring out what to do here. First, if someone constructs a character that is similar to himself socially, then he can probably roleplay his character and not need to represent that character via dice rolls. Thus, like the article reads, points placed in the character's social skills would be wasted. Second, if a character is socially dissimilar from its player, then you need to figure out a way to portray those social differences.
Overall, we come across a bit of a conundrum: factually speaking, a player who can roleplay certain things well need not put points into it, but then the character is being portrayed incorrectly.
I don't know how to fix this. *shrug*

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Doc, The Weasel at 2003-10-17 11:40:04
Converted from Phorums BB System

I usually just "translate" what the player said into whatever their character's skill (or die roll) suggests. If the player puts at least some modicum of effort into making it sound good, then I'm satisfied.

Similarly, if a player performs some faux-paus which their character would know better, I repeat what happened, with an ammended action ("you approach the empress AND BOW LOW. ONCE SHE ACKNOWLEDGES YOU. you say...") or I just tell the player that said action would be bad. If the player doesn't insist that he wants to act as stated, then the player is satisfied and the character integrity is maintained.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Timothy Groth at 2003-10-17 12:56:00
Converted from Phorums BB System

If a player consistently uses skills that he has but the character does not have I don't give that player experience points, instead I award them an appropriate level of the skills and start giving them points once that debt is payed off. I tell players about this policy before we start playing and only had one person decide not to play and have had few in game complaints.

Players should roleplay the character they made. If a players makes someone who isn't smooth they shouldn't use good lines but be blunt/rude/mumbly as appropriate. Yes this penalizes them in social situations but that is part of the character. It is no less "cheating" to deliver a brilliant in character speach when you have no social skills than to declare a character has executed a perfect example of the Thousand Burning Fist technique and killed all near by enemies even though the character has no martial arts. Players not comfortable with this idea should only play characters that are identical to themselves.

Under skilling is far less of a problem, at least it has been in games I've played. Generally in those cases the players come up with good solutions. Either they come up with good plans or make an attempt but make it clear that the character isn't a neeb. Alternatively prepared speeches for characters who should be good at giving them off the cuff works well. It is no different than notes and references for characters with amazingly good memory or esoteric knowledge.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Jethrow at 2003-10-20 01:19:50
Converted from Phorums BB System

Dude, ditch the rules-light bias. Free your mind. You know you want to...

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Jethrow at 2003-10-20 01:38:51
Converted from Phorums BB System

Spot on. You are making good sense here. Thank goodness, because I was wondering if anybody else in the roleplaying world did things like my group does. Bravo. Another win for maintaining adequate oxygen flow to the brain.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Rob Carriere at 2003-10-20 04:40:37
Converted from Phorums BB System

Lemme get this straight. You _want_ me to free my mind? Sure you're out of range? :->

Slightly more seriously, I have run campaigns in rules-light, rules-heavy and in rules-free mode, so my mind, it thinks it knows what it's thinking about...

S "Looting the Mental Liberation League" R
--

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Adam Dray at 2003-10-20 13:11:57
Converted from Phorums BB System

In my D&D campaigns, a couple high level characters have achieved ability scores in the low 20's (20 or 21, typically). It's difficult to play a character who must have an IQ of, say, 200. Most players aren't that smart.

I use the same techniques described in this thread: interpret the player's choice of actions in a better way for the character.

I also have a house rule that allows a player to **retroactively** perform actions. For example, a 20 Intelligence wizard can once a day say, 'Yes, I know I didn't memorize that spell, but I would have because I'm a brilliant planner' or 'I should have known they'd challenge me to a game of Horbenscuff; let's just say I brought my custom Horbenscliffers with me.'

Retroactions are a nice perk for characters with very high scores.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by The Matt at 2003-10-20 19:23:50
Converted from Phorums BB System

The problem with your example Adam Dray is that it provides an extremely high benefit to characters with high mental scores (Int, Wis, Cha) in comparison to characters with high physical scores (Str, Dex, Con). This extremely intelligent Wizard already gains the advantage of having tons of skill points, bonus spells, high save DCs, bonuses to certain skills, etc. He doesn't need the extra advantage of being able to change his spell selection after memorized, or change his equipment list.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by John at 2003-10-20 19:24:05
Converted from Phorums BB System

Retroactions are a nice perk for characters with very high scores.


I like this idea a lot.

I occasionally have players do the opposite.

Player "Hey wait, I have an Idea - oh, my character is not smart enough to think of it, nevermind"

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Adam Dray at 2003-10-20 19:34:36
Converted from Phorums BB System

In practice it's worked fine. Characters with high physical scores get many opportunities to take advantage of them. Characters with high Intelligence or Wisdom need a little help in combat-oriented games.

If you're concerned about slighting those with high Dexterity or whatever, just give them something similar. For example, anyone with Dex 20 may "redo" any agility-related action once per game session.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Adam Dray at 2003-10-20 19:36:58
Converted from Phorums BB System

You could easily apply a rule to anyone with a score of 6 or lower: "The GM gets to retroactively make you do something stupid when you meant to do something clever."

But, most likely, characters with very low ability scores don't need additional trouble. You should reward them for playing characters with disadvantages rather than min-maxing to the extreme. ;)

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by LJS at 2003-11-14 06:37:19
Converted from Phorums BB System

There's many a problem here.

Often, when the player has a brilliant idea, clever quip, or good suggestion, the GM is likely to go with it. It is a major downer to say "Nice move, old chap, too bad Strong-Jawed Jim isn't that clever." This can be extremely frustrating for the non-glib player who's character has the skills to shine in social/mystery situations even if they don't, when they see Strong-Jawed Jim's glib player stealing their glory without the underlying skills. (I've been on both sides of this problem.) I've had long arguments with GMs who see nothing wrong with this and don't limit the character's effectiveness to its skills.

Another problem found in several systems is that it can be incredibily easy to become a social monster. We've got a 10th level bard in our 3.5e game that routinely hits Diplomacy checks in the 40s. Not a powerful combat character, but our combat monsters don't usually hit ACs that high. Once the character's skill gets that out of balance, there's not alot of challenge for social situations and the GMs are back to "A big monster jumps out and attacks you."

Finally, social "combat" systems seem rudamentary, lacking in the loving detail given to combat. Kidd's Lace and Steel had some decent stuff here, but the system is long out of print. Magic systems often make some social skills pointless with charms, suggestions, detecting lies, and reading thoughts.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Stein at 2003-11-16 04:00:25
Converted from Phorums BB System

I don't like the idea of retroactivity myself. Sometimes it can't be avoided, like when the GM makes a mistake or forgets something:

Player:
-Captain Loose Breeches jumps into the water and escapes? But you said they were huge sharks in the water, and that's why we couldn't swim out here in the first place! ...OK, that's it for the scourge of the Bahamas i suppose!

GM
-um ...uh, um he didn't actually jump into the water... it's more like he thought about it.. but didn't.

Instead I have my players say what they INTEND to do, and then I describe what actually happens.

I also feel the players should take the time to learn a bit about what their character is good at, and not leave everything to the GM. How would I know what a forensic specialist with an IQ of 200 would do in every situation? Better to let the player read up on forensic techniques so I can concentrate on preparing and running the game.

I've found that this leads to a lot more interesting descriptions of what happens, although I'd have to accept that sometimes the players are in a position to correct ME.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Yalaz Ozkanli at 2003-11-17 05:14:22
Converted from Phorums BB System

This is so totally true..

I would like to give a good example of this problem with two players from my group, Mr. Loud and Mr. Meek.

Mr. Loud is the kind of guy who sits around the gaming table and speaks VERY LOUDLY and very frequently in social encounters, mostly in the way that the player himself would have spoken regardless of character. This results in Rank 1 werewolves trying to teach their totems how wrong racial discrimination is, or mute characters who interrupt the game frequently to explain what they are typing on their datapads. The most problematic aspect here is that this player gets really sore when you tell him his character would never do that.

Then there is Mr. Meek who always waits for his turn to speak at the table, who keeps his voice low, and plays the character he has as best as he can, and usually quite accurately portraying the character's arsenal of skills and personality quirks. He is also a very intelligent person who can reach conclusions and solve mysteries before other members of the group usually can. The problem with this character is that he doesn't speak much, he's a silent kid and his character's ideas and skills usually do not see the light until Mr. Loud has gotten sore and gone quiet.

Now, to demonstrate the problem, I want to give example of a Delta Green scene.. Mr Loud's character is a forensic's expert examining a body. Mr Meek's character is an FBI Special Agent. Mr. Loud asks to do check a body they have found, and rolls the skill, and succeeds, so I give him information about the gender, age, probable time of murder, method of murder (handgun bullet through the head), and the probable angle and proximity of attack. Then Mr. Meek says he is looking for the cartridge - He rolls his search and finds it, then asks me what caliber it is and I tell him. Mr. Loud all of a sudden breaks into rage about how I did not tell him the caliber of the bullet even though he said he checked the wound. I went cross eyed and fainted. When I woke up, I learned that Mr. Loud and Mr. Meek had a heated argument when Mr. Meek asked Mr. Loud why he has been talking to all the suspects all day when Mr. Meek is supposedly the Special Agent in charge..

You see - it's very difficult to handle both cases and neither dicing nor roleplaying doesn't seem to cure this problem I have.. The players either realize their mistakes and change themselves, after incidents like this, or you end up having to say bye bye to the kind of player who has low social skills and high combat skills but talks all the time.. Luckily for me, Mr. Loud turned out to be a great roleplayer eventually.

Regards,
Yalaz Ozkanli