Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
There's that one hermit character you know with Charisma of 20 and +9 to Persuasion, that guy's pretty smooth. The lunk playing him is extraordinarily bad at roleplaying, though.
Good old hermit sorcerers with massive Charisma and somehow are amazing at social situations despite talking to people like once a year for most of their life
you think you practice a lot of conversations in your head,
I do sadly in real life which I feel had lead me to just not talking to people and second guessing
Nor does it help I created a larp character for work
0
Options
valhalla13013 Dark Shield Perceives the GodsRegistered Userregular
I was able to snag a Player's Handbook on Amazon with a sweet Cyber Monday deal. Now to just save up for the other three or four books I'll inevitably need/want.
+15
Options
MsAnthropyThe Lady of Pain Breaks the Rhythm, Breaks the Rhythm, Breaks the RhythmThe City of FlowersRegistered Userregular
At level 10ish or so I feel like it's worth less than +5 for sure for a lot of cases in combat
Like our 5e group has most of the characters rolling with +10 or so to their attack rolls, and the highest AC they've come up against yet is about 21 or 22.
So far Advantage is most useful for the ranger when he uses the -5 attack +10 damage feat.
This is exactly the point...
The bonus provided by advantage is dependent on what you need to roll on the d20
yeah which is why I am quite fine with the advantage mechanic
I think it's way more interesting out of combat than in combat though
It's also super fun to determine in some situations, especially social situations.
I have to be kinda careful with how I give out advantage in social situations, because not every player is really good at being charismatic irl on the fly like that, and I want earning advantage for such things to be fairly even and reliable
usually I've been basing it on a character's history or inherent experiences. Such as our Lizardman barbarian was raised by a noble family of humans, so he's actually pretty good at the whole etiquette and smoozing thing. Or our Monk was a glass-blower by trade, so she's pretty good at dealing with other artisans or the like.
Or if the player brings up an important bit of information when talking to someone (mentioning the name of a giant king's daughter to convince him you're legitimately here to help him, for example)- since that is just logic and a bit of memory rather than player social skills
but I tend to only occasionally give out advantage for someone being really eloquent IRL, because otherwise I find it discourages other players from trying to do so if they don't feel as confident at that. Instead I'll usually silently adjust a target DC a little bit (and sometimes I make DCs harder if a player tries to pass a persuade check while doing something really foolish etc)
This is why I always have players simply describe the gist of what they are trying to convey in a social check, have them roll, and only then have them narrate the outcome. Prevents a ton of cognitive whiplash when the eloquent speech the player came up with is borked by the player character on he actually roll. Plus, it lets those who are less creative or not feeling he game that night get to have their characters still look cool on a great roll.
Good old hermit sorcerers with massive Charisma and somehow are amazing at social situations despite talking to people like once a year for most of their life
*emerges from the undergrowth covered in bark and ants* Llllllllllladies. 8-)
I was able to snag a Player's Handbook on Amazon with a sweet Cyber Monday deal. Now to just save up for the other three or four books I'll inevitably need/want.
Are you going to be a player or a DM?
As a player, the PHB is all you really need, but if you are getting a second one, Xanathar's Guide to Everything is the most relevant
Sword Coast, Volo's and Mordenkainen's all have a few player options, but PHB+Xanathar will get you like 98%
Just a heads up, the 5th edition DMG is on sale for $24.99 and the Monster Manual is on sale for $19.99 right now on Amazon, snagged them as a gift for a friend
Everyone had a great time (so much so that the two I work with got anther co-worker hype on it and he's gonna come check it out, be The Guest Star) and we've already got a session scheduled for the start of January!
Great to hear everybody picked it up and ran with it! The Guest Star is a pretty solid aux playbook for purpose.
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited December 2018
The "should a charismatic player get a bonus to their roll for talking well" thing has been an eternal bugaboo of RPGs but I don't think it needs to be that difficult.
In a situation where you're making a social roll, it's because you need something from the NPC, right? You're haggling with the merchant, or trying to persuade the heartless king to send his armies to defend the village from the monsters, or trying to trick the jail guard into giving you their keys, or trying to inspire the townsfolk to defend themselves from the raiders. It's not a random, unstructured interaction; there's always a point to it.
And no matter what else is true about the situation, we know for a fact that the NPC can do the thing, but is reluctant to do the thing. Because if they couldn't do the thing, why are you having the players roll, when you can just have the NPC say "no?" And if they can do the thing and aren't reluctant to do the thing, why are you having the players roll, when the NPC could just go "ok?"
So let's look at why people don't want to do things for other people. That sounds like a big task, but when you break it down, it comes down to a finite list of possibilities.
- Doing the thing would cost them too much. "40 percent discount? Outrageous!" "If I send my personal guards to defend the village, who will guard me from Count Darko's assassins?" "It could mean me job if I leave me post."
- They literally don't believe they can do the thing. "We're just simple townsfolk, we'd be slaughtered!"
- They don't believe you. "A dracolich? Beneath that sleepy hamlet? You fools must be mad. Nothing has disturbed the peace there in a thousand years."
- They don't believe you have the authority or standing to speak to them, or that you can deliver what you're promising. "Who are you to speak thus to a king?" "I'm supposed to sell you this precious dragon scale to a wandering vagabond? These letters of credit from the Marquess are obviously a forgery!"
- They just don't like your stupid face.
And the nature of the NPC's objection, should, of course, determine what will be the most successful tack for the PCs to take. PCs can
- Make an offer to the NPC. "If you send your guards to the village, we'll protect you from Count Darko's assassins."
- Make an...offer to the NPC. "It would be a shame if Count Darko won more converts to his cause by protecting the village himself."
- Present evidence. "The village of Thornbrush was in this situation forty years ago, and they stopped the bandits. You can too! You just need to do X, Y, and Z."
- Establish their credibility. "I am a Knight of the Shining Order, sworn to the seventh house, and I say the dragon threat is real!!!"
- Get a different, less dumb face. Maybe they go on a shopping montage and get clothes appropriate for court, or flatter the NPC, or speak to them in the ancient formal tongue, or whatever.
And then of course some of these things might become their own social tests ("you don't look like you can protect me from the assassins") in branching fractal fashion.
In other words, a social situation is a type of problem, and the problem comes in different flavors that require different tactics, exactly like a puzzle or a trap or a mystery or a combat. Should a mellifluous player get to skate through social situations because they speak well? Probably not, in the same way that a player shouldn't be able to auto-crit on an attack just because they describe the sword swing well.
But they should absolutely be rewarded for picking the right tactic, for exactly the same reasons that it would be shitty for you to not reward them using good tactics in the combat or good problem-solving in the puzzles! If you've established that the heartless king really loves his daughter, and the PCs mention the innkeeper's poor daughter was hurt by the gnolls, that should be worth something!
I mean, when it seems like a charismatic player is getting away with stuff at the table, maybe it's because they're bamboozling the GM with big words and fancy talkin' or by being one of those mysterious girls you hear about sometimes, but it's probably just as likely that they're socially ept and are just unconsciously hashing this out in their heads as they play. Maybe their character's "persuasive argument" was, in fact, just a legitimately persuasive argument!
So what this means for GMs trying to balance ths scales between sociable, talkative players and shyer or more anxious or just less wordy folks is that you should have a clear idea of what your NPCs' goals and desires are, let the players have clear ways to discern those goals and desires (Insight checks or tavern rumors from a Streetwise roll or magic or etc etc), and have the players' odds of success be influenced by their approach to addressing those NPC goals and desires.
You don't need someone to actually make an impassioned speech calling on the king's sense of justice if you can get players to at least think in terms of saying "I make an impassioned speech calling on the king's sense of justice," because that at least shows that they're thinking of the king as a character with goals and thinking of their own character as the sort of person who makes impassioned speeches. The goal here isn't to have every speaking floridly in-character (although that is great if it happens!) but to get away from "I roll Persuade at the king."
Jacobkosh on
+23
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
I was able to snag a Player's Handbook on Amazon with a sweet Cyber Monday deal. Now to just save up for the other three or four books I'll inevitably need/want.
Are you going to be a player or a DM?
As a player, the PHB is all you really need, but if you are getting a second one, Xanathar's Guide to Everything is the most relevant
Sword Coast, Volo's and Mordenkainen's all have a few player options, but PHB+Xanathar will get you like 98%
I wanted to dm my daughter and some of her friends thru some stuff.
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
I was able to snag a Player's Handbook on Amazon with a sweet Cyber Monday deal. Now to just save up for the other three or four books I'll inevitably need/want.
Are you going to be a player or a DM?
As a player, the PHB is all you really need, but if you are getting a second one, Xanathar's Guide to Everything is the most relevant
Sword Coast, Volo's and Mordenkainen's all have a few player options, but PHB+Xanathar will get you like 98%
I wanted to dm my daughter and some of her friends thru some stuff.
You'll want the Dungeon Master's guide, and it's probably easiest to start with a pre-made campaign.
my response to "charismatic players getting bonuses for charisma rolls" will always be "if he gets to use his real life silver tongue to win in the game, i get to beat you up for fights."
fair is fair, and if you're letting steve's lack of social anxiety let me be better, you better believe i am wanting to use my gross ogre like body to win fights.
on a more serious note (though that is a stance i seriously take) there is a disconnect between play and character abilities that should be respected.
Like, yes you can figure out that using the shopkeeper's daughter as something to ply at the king with, but would you eight charisma character? no. no they wouldn't. now, maybe you suggest it out of character to the person playing the charisma character who isn't as socially adept as you. give them the parts of the cunning argument to make them feel smart and socially savvy. it is a team game after all, help your fellow player feel good.
At level 10ish or so I feel like it's worth less than +5 for sure for a lot of cases in combat
Like our 5e group has most of the characters rolling with +10 or so to their attack rolls, and the highest AC they've come up against yet is about 21 or 22.
So far Advantage is most useful for the ranger when he uses the -5 attack +10 damage feat.
This is exactly the point...
The bonus provided by advantage is dependent on what you need to roll on the d20
yeah which is why I am quite fine with the advantage mechanic
I think it's way more interesting out of combat than in combat though
It's also super fun to determine in some situations, especially social situations.
I have to be kinda careful with how I give out advantage in social situations, because not every player is really good at being charismatic irl on the fly like that, and I want earning advantage for such things to be fairly even and reliable
usually I've been basing it on a character's history or inherent experiences. Such as our Lizardman barbarian was raised by a noble family of humans, so he's actually pretty good at the whole etiquette and smoozing thing. Or our Monk was a glass-blower by trade, so she's pretty good at dealing with other artisans or the like.
Or if the player brings up an important bit of information when talking to someone (mentioning the name of a giant king's daughter to convince him you're legitimately here to help him, for example)- since that is just logic and a bit of memory rather than player social skills
but I tend to only occasionally give out advantage for someone being really eloquent IRL, because otherwise I find it discourages other players from trying to do so if they don't feel as confident at that. Instead I'll usually silently adjust a target DC a little bit (and sometimes I make DCs harder if a player tries to pass a persuade check while doing something really foolish etc)
This is why I always have players simply describe the gist of what they are trying to convey in a social check, have them roll, and only then have them narrate the outcome. Prevents a ton of cognitive whiplash when the eloquent speech the player came up with is borked by the player character on he actually roll. Plus, it lets those who are less creative or not feeling he game that night get to have their characters still look cool on a great roll.
yeah usually when I ask players what they're saying to an NPC I want to know the angle of approach, or information they are giving, or their tone or attitude, rather than exactly how they word everything
if a character is rude to someone then, yeah, they'll get an appropriate response most of the time (which may or may not be what the party wants!), if you're honest and present information the NPC would be interested in, then you've absolutely taken the right approach and I'll reward that
Excuse me? I'll have you know that Robert's scaly skin is genetic, and it helps protect him from ne'er-do-wells.
Robert undressed in the pool at the office party and summoned mephits. He keeps saying it’s for cultural reasons but he was raised in Highvale like the rest of us.
Endless_Serpents on
+1
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
That may or may not be true, Robert is a fucking piss-tank. The man never met a vice he didn't want to spend his entire life "indulging" in...
I was able to snag a Player's Handbook on Amazon with a sweet Cyber Monday deal. Now to just save up for the other three or four books I'll inevitably need/want.
Are you going to be a player or a DM?
As a player, the PHB is all you really need, but if you are getting a second one, Xanathar's Guide to Everything is the most relevant
Sword Coast, Volo's and Mordenkainen's all have a few player options, but PHB+Xanathar will get you like 98%
I wanted to dm my daughter and some of her friends thru some stuff.
You'll want the Dungeon Master's guide, and it's probably easiest to start with a pre-made campaign.
Yeah, I used to play and DM 2nd edition. I just need to get caught up on the new rules.
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Hopefully our weekly D&D game happens tonight.
And hopefully our Druid doesn't bring a huge dish because the last time she did my roommate & I got food poisoning.
my response to "charismatic players getting bonuses for charisma rolls" will always be "if he gets to use his real life silver tongue to win in the game, i get to beat you up for fights."
fair is fair, and if you're letting steve's lack of social anxiety let me be better, you better believe i am wanting to use my gross ogre like body to win fights.
I sometimes try to push my characters to role play a bit more. For instance in my group I have a player whos someone I've known for years, shes pretty soft spoken unless provoked, but shes playing a tough dwarf rogue. She wanted to intimidate the shop keeper to give them a discount on potions, she rolled very well but I just had to ask "So what do you do or say?" and she couldn't think of anything. After a minute of her trying to think of something I asked if she was OK with my wife tagging in for a second (slightly more experienced player but also very intimidating IRL) she said sure, So my wife reminded her she was currently covered in zombie blood, and had two large daggers at her side, and sometimes you don't need to say anything. She got the idea, and said she just pulled out her daggers, leaned on them, and said a little forcefully "I bet 50 gold would work fine right?". I don't like making people feel uncomfortable, but I also think playing a character thats against your own type can be fun
I'm more comfortable with roleplay if I look at myself as the person who's writing the character, rather than the person playing them. The drama student kind of roleplay I find a bit cringey, but each to their own.
i am currently trying to play a character who is kind of dim witted and not at all snarky. and as a snarky asshole that has been, something. trying not to argue with people when they make suggestions i think are dumb but my character wouldn't have an opinion on has been a bigger deal that expected.
Everyone had a great time (so much so that the two I work with got anther co-worker hype on it and he's gonna come check it out, be The Guest Star) and we've already got a session scheduled for the start of January!
Great to hear everybody picked it up and ran with it! The Guest Star is a pretty solid aux playbook for purpose.
It worked great. It's well worth the 99 cents and then some! Especially because it lets someone contribute as much or as little as they want to without having to do the big char gen and still have a fun time.
I'm more comfortable with roleplay if I look at myself as the person who's writing the character, rather than the person playing them. The drama student kind of roleplay I find a bit cringey, but each to their own.
Yeah I get that, but to me, if your rolling to persuade to intimidate or seduce, you should at least be able to tell me HOW your going to do it, any preferably what your character says/does. Not just "I rolled a 23, so I convince them".
I ham it straight up though. I have a great character I only got to play in 3 sessions I want to whip out again asap
what would you consider the drama student stuff to be?
I would say that attempting to stay in character the entire game, yelping with surprise, looking scared during narration etc triggers that for me. It's something I've seen a lot on actual play streams that the players think is part of their showreel.
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it, it's just very much not for me. It can seem a bit self-indulgent, which is absolutely fine if that's what people want to do with their leisure time.
I'm more comfortable with roleplay if I look at myself as the person who's writing the character, rather than the person playing them. The drama student kind of roleplay I find a bit cringey, but each to their own.
Yeah I get that, but to me, if your rolling to persuade to intimidate or seduce, you should at least be able to tell me HOW your going to do it, any preferably what your character says/does. Not just "I rolled a 23, so I convince them".
Oh absolutely, I don't think the two are connected at all. I think you should have to explain what you're going to do before the DM even lets you roll. Having said that, I did cut short a conversation with a DM character who was a small dog after some back and forth with "I have nine dice in talking to dogs and I'm asking the dog to follow me somewhere, just let me roll".
Vampire! It's actually a mere 8 dice, 3 in Manipulation and 4 in Animal Ken (speciality, canines for an extra dice). For the sake of comparison, this is a character min maxed to talk to dogs and those stats would make her one of the top five best dog handlers on the planet even if she couldn't literally talk to them as though they were people (which she can).
i am currently trying to play a character who is kind of dim witted and not at all snarky. and as a snarky asshole that has been, something. trying not to argue with people when they make suggestions i think are dumb but my character wouldn't have an opinion on has been a bigger deal that expected.
hopefully it is working.
Can still be low key snarky, but the character is into it. Somebody says something stupid and your character immideately says “Sure, checks out.” Sometimes being fully sincere is the darkest shade you can throw.
I'm more comfortable with roleplay if I look at myself as the person who's writing the character, rather than the person playing them. The drama student kind of roleplay I find a bit cringey, but each to their own.
Role-playing games are interesting because it is acting but it's collaborative story-telling as well. Sometimes you make a decision that's better for the story as a whole than for your individual character.
what would you consider the drama student stuff to be?
I would say that attempting to stay in character the entire game, yelping with surprise, looking scared during narration etc triggers that for me. It's something I've seen a lot on actual play streams that the players think is part of their showreel.
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it, it's just very much not for me. It can seem a bit self-indulgent, which is absolutely fine if that's what people want to do with their leisure time.
This is why I am largely leery of going to this larp thing my friend invited me to. While I like to inhabit my character a bit, I'm not really comfortable getting all method with it or trying to do it the whole time during a D&D or whatever. My go to is in character voice is me speaking as the character and normal voice is out of character. Still a lot of myself bleeds through into my characters, as is bound to happen, and so I often come out as a somehow idealized version of me but not without some flaw or other. But like trying to inhabit a character for a whole day sounds exhausting. I like really clear bounds between myself and my character.
The feeling I have of my character being a kind of reflection of myself really makes me understand why I get so upset with my DM when they try to force me into some stereotypical character mold from their days in 2e and 3.5 respectively. Plus they almost all like being some flavor of well mannered, high born noble class characters with long family trees and shit and... Woof that just rubs me all kinds of the wrong was on a personal level. Which is why the barbarian fits so well compared to the Paladin.
I weird about doing LARP back in college, but I went to one event with my buddy and it was really cool. People were in character during the fights (it was Dagorhir so not strict RP stuff) and then break character and just goof off during the breaks. And some people had really cool outfits and characters.
i am currently trying to play a character who is kind of dim witted and not at all snarky. and as a snarky asshole that has been, something. trying not to argue with people when they make suggestions i think are dumb but my character wouldn't have an opinion on has been a bigger deal that expected.
hopefully it is working.
Hey, we got through the gate and all it cost us was a small trip to the swamp to look for small horrible lizards.
i am currently trying to play a character who is kind of dim witted and not at all snarky. and as a snarky asshole that has been, something. trying not to argue with people when they make suggestions i think are dumb but my character wouldn't have an opinion on has been a bigger deal that expected.
hopefully it is working.
Hey, we got through the gate and all it cost us was a small trip to the swamp to look for small horrible lizards.
surprisingly, the luchador bird slash manager of an orphanage ended up being the hardest amongst us all
Miss me? Find me on:
Twitch (I stream most days of the week) Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Posts
I do sadly in real life which I feel had lead me to just not talking to people and second guessing
Nor does it help I created a larp character for work
This is why I always have players simply describe the gist of what they are trying to convey in a social check, have them roll, and only then have them narrate the outcome. Prevents a ton of cognitive whiplash when the eloquent speech the player came up with is borked by the player character on he actually roll. Plus, it lets those who are less creative or not feeling he game that night get to have their characters still look cool on a great roll.
"The only real politics I knew was that if a guy liked Hitler, I’d beat the stuffing out of him and that would be it." -- Jack Kirby
*emerges from the undergrowth covered in bark and ants* Llllllllllladies. 8-)
Are you going to be a player or a DM?
As a player, the PHB is all you really need, but if you are getting a second one, Xanathar's Guide to Everything is the most relevant
Sword Coast, Volo's and Mordenkainen's all have a few player options, but PHB+Xanathar will get you like 98%
The hermit sorcerer is terrifying, the orc paladin is commanding, not sexy or witty, though a flamboyant bard might be both.
Great to hear everybody picked it up and ran with it! The Guest Star is a pretty solid aux playbook for purpose.
In a situation where you're making a social roll, it's because you need something from the NPC, right? You're haggling with the merchant, or trying to persuade the heartless king to send his armies to defend the village from the monsters, or trying to trick the jail guard into giving you their keys, or trying to inspire the townsfolk to defend themselves from the raiders. It's not a random, unstructured interaction; there's always a point to it.
And no matter what else is true about the situation, we know for a fact that the NPC can do the thing, but is reluctant to do the thing. Because if they couldn't do the thing, why are you having the players roll, when you can just have the NPC say "no?" And if they can do the thing and aren't reluctant to do the thing, why are you having the players roll, when the NPC could just go "ok?"
So let's look at why people don't want to do things for other people. That sounds like a big task, but when you break it down, it comes down to a finite list of possibilities.
- Doing the thing would cost them too much. "40 percent discount? Outrageous!" "If I send my personal guards to defend the village, who will guard me from Count Darko's assassins?" "It could mean me job if I leave me post."
- They literally don't believe they can do the thing. "We're just simple townsfolk, we'd be slaughtered!"
- They don't believe you. "A dracolich? Beneath that sleepy hamlet? You fools must be mad. Nothing has disturbed the peace there in a thousand years."
- They don't believe you have the authority or standing to speak to them, or that you can deliver what you're promising. "Who are you to speak thus to a king?" "I'm supposed to sell you this precious dragon scale to a wandering vagabond? These letters of credit from the Marquess are obviously a forgery!"
- They just don't like your stupid face.
And the nature of the NPC's objection, should, of course, determine what will be the most successful tack for the PCs to take. PCs can
- Make an offer to the NPC. "If you send your guards to the village, we'll protect you from Count Darko's assassins."
- Make an...offer to the NPC. "It would be a shame if Count Darko won more converts to his cause by protecting the village himself."
- Present evidence. "The village of Thornbrush was in this situation forty years ago, and they stopped the bandits. You can too! You just need to do X, Y, and Z."
- Establish their credibility. "I am a Knight of the Shining Order, sworn to the seventh house, and I say the dragon threat is real!!!"
- Get a different, less dumb face. Maybe they go on a shopping montage and get clothes appropriate for court, or flatter the NPC, or speak to them in the ancient formal tongue, or whatever.
And then of course some of these things might become their own social tests ("you don't look like you can protect me from the assassins") in branching fractal fashion.
In other words, a social situation is a type of problem, and the problem comes in different flavors that require different tactics, exactly like a puzzle or a trap or a mystery or a combat. Should a mellifluous player get to skate through social situations because they speak well? Probably not, in the same way that a player shouldn't be able to auto-crit on an attack just because they describe the sword swing well.
But they should absolutely be rewarded for picking the right tactic, for exactly the same reasons that it would be shitty for you to not reward them using good tactics in the combat or good problem-solving in the puzzles! If you've established that the heartless king really loves his daughter, and the PCs mention the innkeeper's poor daughter was hurt by the gnolls, that should be worth something!
I mean, when it seems like a charismatic player is getting away with stuff at the table, maybe it's because they're bamboozling the GM with big words and fancy talkin' or by being one of those mysterious girls you hear about sometimes, but it's probably just as likely that they're socially ept and are just unconsciously hashing this out in their heads as they play. Maybe their character's "persuasive argument" was, in fact, just a legitimately persuasive argument!
So what this means for GMs trying to balance ths scales between sociable, talkative players and shyer or more anxious or just less wordy folks is that you should have a clear idea of what your NPCs' goals and desires are, let the players have clear ways to discern those goals and desires (Insight checks or tavern rumors from a Streetwise roll or magic or etc etc), and have the players' odds of success be influenced by their approach to addressing those NPC goals and desires.
You don't need someone to actually make an impassioned speech calling on the king's sense of justice if you can get players to at least think in terms of saying "I make an impassioned speech calling on the king's sense of justice," because that at least shows that they're thinking of the king as a character with goals and thinking of their own character as the sort of person who makes impassioned speeches. The goal here isn't to have every speaking floridly in-character (although that is great if it happens!) but to get away from "I roll Persuade at the king."
Excuse me? I'll have you know that Robert's scaly skin is genetic, and it helps protect him from ne'er-do-wells.
I wanted to dm my daughter and some of her friends thru some stuff.
You'll want the Dungeon Master's guide, and it's probably easiest to start with a pre-made campaign.
fair is fair, and if you're letting steve's lack of social anxiety let me be better, you better believe i am wanting to use my gross ogre like body to win fights.
Like, yes you can figure out that using the shopkeeper's daughter as something to ply at the king with, but would you eight charisma character? no. no they wouldn't. now, maybe you suggest it out of character to the person playing the charisma character who isn't as socially adept as you. give them the parts of the cunning argument to make them feel smart and socially savvy. it is a team game after all, help your fellow player feel good.
yeah usually when I ask players what they're saying to an NPC I want to know the angle of approach, or information they are giving, or their tone or attitude, rather than exactly how they word everything
if a character is rude to someone then, yeah, they'll get an appropriate response most of the time (which may or may not be what the party wants!), if you're honest and present information the NPC would be interested in, then you've absolutely taken the right approach and I'll reward that
Robert undressed in the pool at the office party and summoned mephits. He keeps saying it’s for cultural reasons but he was raised in Highvale like the rest of us.
Basically the movie The Hangover, but Alan can cast spells.
Yeah, I used to play and DM 2nd edition. I just need to get caught up on the new rules.
And hopefully our Druid doesn't bring a huge dish because the last time she did my roommate & I got food poisoning.
I sometimes try to push my characters to role play a bit more. For instance in my group I have a player whos someone I've known for years, shes pretty soft spoken unless provoked, but shes playing a tough dwarf rogue. She wanted to intimidate the shop keeper to give them a discount on potions, she rolled very well but I just had to ask "So what do you do or say?" and she couldn't think of anything. After a minute of her trying to think of something I asked if she was OK with my wife tagging in for a second (slightly more experienced player but also very intimidating IRL) she said sure, So my wife reminded her she was currently covered in zombie blood, and had two large daggers at her side, and sometimes you don't need to say anything. She got the idea, and said she just pulled out her daggers, leaned on them, and said a little forcefully "I bet 50 gold would work fine right?". I don't like making people feel uncomfortable, but I also think playing a character thats against your own type can be fun
hopefully it is working.
It worked great. It's well worth the 99 cents and then some! Especially because it lets someone contribute as much or as little as they want to without having to do the big char gen and still have a fun time.
Yeah I get that, but to me, if your rolling to persuade to intimidate or seduce, you should at least be able to tell me HOW your going to do it, any preferably what your character says/does. Not just "I rolled a 23, so I convince them".
I ham it straight up though. I have a great character I only got to play in 3 sessions I want to whip out again asap
I would say that attempting to stay in character the entire game, yelping with surprise, looking scared during narration etc triggers that for me. It's something I've seen a lot on actual play streams that the players think is part of their showreel.
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it, it's just very much not for me. It can seem a bit self-indulgent, which is absolutely fine if that's what people want to do with their leisure time.
Oh absolutely, I don't think the two are connected at all. I think you should have to explain what you're going to do before the DM even lets you roll. Having said that, I did cut short a conversation with a DM character who was a small dog after some back and forth with "I have nine dice in talking to dogs and I'm asking the dog to follow me somewhere, just let me roll".
Can still be low key snarky, but the character is into it. Somebody says something stupid and your character immideately says “Sure, checks out.” Sometimes being fully sincere is the darkest shade you can throw.
Role-playing games are interesting because it is acting but it's collaborative story-telling as well. Sometimes you make a decision that's better for the story as a whole than for your individual character.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
This is why I am largely leery of going to this larp thing my friend invited me to. While I like to inhabit my character a bit, I'm not really comfortable getting all method with it or trying to do it the whole time during a D&D or whatever. My go to is in character voice is me speaking as the character and normal voice is out of character. Still a lot of myself bleeds through into my characters, as is bound to happen, and so I often come out as a somehow idealized version of me but not without some flaw or other. But like trying to inhabit a character for a whole day sounds exhausting. I like really clear bounds between myself and my character.
The feeling I have of my character being a kind of reflection of myself really makes me understand why I get so upset with my DM when they try to force me into some stereotypical character mold from their days in 2e and 3.5 respectively. Plus they almost all like being some flavor of well mannered, high born noble class characters with long family trees and shit and... Woof that just rubs me all kinds of the wrong was on a personal level. Which is why the barbarian fits so well compared to the Paladin.
Hey, we got through the gate and all it cost us was a small trip to the swamp to look for small horrible lizards.
...
Oh
surprisingly, the luchador bird slash manager of an orphanage ended up being the hardest amongst us all
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)