Skill Based PCs

[oldgrayrogue]

Some of the most hilarious RP I have ever witnessed was by the player of a dwarf on my old PW. His PC was a very low INT brawler type dorf who really loved his ale. The player would get him drunk and have him lie about the silliest things and then roll a bluff check -- but he had like a -3 bluff penalty so his rolls were always miserable. It was hysterical and everyone had a blast playing off of his epic fail rolls.

My point is that skill checks should just be an aid to RP, like the cut and color of the custom armor I put on my PC. Each player and DM uses them as they see fit and hopefully we can agree on their use in a way that makes the game fun and exciting for everyone. I agree with Rotku's style -- as long as a player plays his skills and stats that should be enough. Ki, you are certainly a witness to what happens when good RP meets a really bad roll (*cough* Corio *cough*). Sometimes, it ain't pretty and can actually spoil the immersion.

[Veilan]

The problem is when the same sort of investment - skill points, ability scores - is severely skewed in the usefulness, and reward, it gives. A player investing 10 points into diplomacy should have a tangible and notable advantage over someone who doesn't, just like a player with 10 ranks in disable device. The problem with the "soft" skills and abilities is that enough people just get away with cheesing it, since it's so easily done and most of us as players do have higher social and mental abilities than say, our half orc barbarian.

Hence, it is incredibly tough to gear skill / stat investments to give comparable dividends. In fact, DnD 3 and 3.5 took that into account by philosophically making the mental stats worth less - you will find that for almost all subraces, the case is true that 1 physical stat point is usual worth 2 mental stat points. This is among the compelling arguments why dwarves need an LA, too...

[Keryn]

Rotku, Danm, I think what Kiyoti is saying is not that you need to roll every sec. In fact you just mentioned that it makes no sense to see a warrior in fullplate trying to sneak a goblin, it is so dumb that it is implicit it wont happen.

Now my personal opinion, that is backed by some of the posts here in different ways, is that sometimes, we ignore the chance to fail, and find ways, work around, to allow players to succeed.

Now is this necessarily good? Obviously not, and why? Eh... well Leader of X group calls his fellows, to go find the girl, and he takes the dumb Half.Orc, and two of his brawlers (fighters) with him.

Now what to do? The boys get to the forest, yada yada yada, they have no way to scout, though the DM thinks... damm we scheduled this session Im loosing my time here, and so are the players so somehow theres a blood trail, YEEEE we have a lead. ((scoutless party moves on when maybe the event could have simply aborted here and next time, same leader would think SHAITE, I'll be taking a scout this time no matter what, cuz otherwise it will be absolute fail..))
Next they find the camp where the gnolls have the girl, and they think damm if we attack the girl will probably die. So the DM finds a work around, and for a moment the gnolls watching the girl had to take a leak, YEEE we charge in an save the girl. ((Nice rogueless party moves on again, and next time the same leader will once again not feel the need of a rogue, and will recruit the same guys for the same situation, because yee they will do the job, we have done it once and we will do it again.))

Was there a fail option where maybe it was so blatant that this group would fail from the beginning? Well no because deep inside, the we want to have fun and success = fun, that the bad side of things was left out. This somehow makes people unconsciously feel in the right to do it all again, and why not? A PW playerbase ends up being the result of how the DMs DM, they end up being educated in one way or another. And this happens we all know it as some posts prove it, when theres the need there will eventually be the trying it out because yes everyone likes to feel needed, who wants to a play a PC who never has a say, never gets to kill anything or make something that matters?

I remember a thread sometime ago where folks spoke about, something along the lines of how DM were maybe protecting the PCs too much, I guess BG changed that a bit, but for a long long long time I am quite sure the number of PCs that died in a DM event were nearly zero, Im not saying that people should die often in a DM event, they shouldn't but after so many online up time some would eventually happen I guess? Please dont take this into athe wrong way...

Also yes people keep rolling skill based PC, you had some in your party, but tell me, whats their levels VS the fighters you had?

I think you'll find a huge gap between them, and I am inclined to think, skill based PCs often get to the point of despair, and try to do what they shouldn't do, and go out looking for a fight, and end up dieing to some spawn. Because what they should be doing, they cannot...

Is this making any sense?

[johnlewismcleod]

and I am inclined to think, skill based PCs often get to the point of despair, and try to do what they shouldn't do, and go out looking for a fight, and end up dieing to some spawn. Because what they should be doing, they cannot...

Is this making any sense?

Yep...makes plenty of sense. I think it's no secret that I am rather firmly in the "whiner" camp on this one. I've played four skill based PC's in a row in ALFA (that's just what's the most fun for me), and with each one I found the only way to generate income was by hunting and killing monsters. With my most recent girl I have been waiting for a DM to log in and catch my perfumed and coiffed bardess out hunting gobbers and demand of me: "What the F**K do you think you're doing?...How can you possibly justify that IC?". To which I would no doubt lamely respond something along the lines of: "Oh, hi!...uhmmm...well...she used seven potions last night to keep her heroes alive and she needs to buy more :/"

As far as telling DM's how to DM I am definitely in the Rotku camp, however...DMing is a tough and often thankless endeavour and if we want to keep our DM's happy and willing to invest time and effort in animating our world for us, we need to give them the respect and freedom essential to that task. I think it is safe to say that all have taken note of the excellent points raised here on skill use in DMed events and hope we can move past that now.

OGR and Mr D have made some excellent suggestions concerning the imbalance, but I'm sure there are more clever suggestions out there...*pauses, ....scans the internet horizon for signs of Hollyfant*.

[hollyfant]

Me? Are you kidding me? I got too much of a reputation for being a whiner (in large part due to being a whiner) to get involved in this discussion. Besides, the annoying thing is: everybody is right thusfar.

Yes, soft-skill based PCs are getting the shaft. Most hard-skill based ones too, for that matter.
Yes, DMs have to have the freedom to weave a tale, and need to have fun doing so.
Yes, builders have put in a lot of skill-focused statics, have other things to do too and need to worry about balance and abusability as well.

The next, 1.23 update of the game should see the introduction of a whole slew of skills. Perhaps we should take that opportunity to agree on exactly what a skill - or the absence of a skill - does for a character. As a roleplaying aid to builders, players and dungeon masters alike.

[Rotku]

Rotku, Danm, I think what Kiyoti is saying is not that you need to roll every sec. In fact you just mentioned that it makes no sense to see a warrior in fullplate trying to sneak a goblin, it is so dumb that it is implicit it wont happen.

I know. I gave extreme situations. But it can be applied just as easily to less extreme cases.

It's just that as soon as someone starts talking about regulating, these stupid situations do pop up. People need a certain degree of freedom to work best. If you would like your DM to do something a bit different, have a polite chat with them - I admit it grates me the wrong way when someone starts saying that DMs should be doing things this way and not that way.

[kiyoti]

Keryn
Rotku, Danm, I think what Kiyoti is saying is not that you need to roll every sec

+1 thanks mate.


To me what makes this game so special is that we can become something we are not. One of the ways this is done is by taking skills/attributes we don’t have IRL. Not all players have social graces and so they aren’t the best at it IC, but they have the skills that MAKE their PC’s good at it even if they are not. Same goes with being stronger or smarter or better looking than we are IRL.

Rotku
That's what skills are for, as far as I am concerned. They express what our characters can do, and how well they can do it. If characters express their stats correctly, they get more RP XP. If characters clearly play outside of their stats, I let them know and they get less RP XP

Not everyone can express their stats correctly IC because they don’t have those skills OOC (especially social skills). Does that mean their PC doesn’t have those abilities because you don’t think they act like it IC? A lot of people play this game to get out of their own skin, denying them a skill check is like robbing them of that chance IMO. What it sounds like your saying is if you cant do it OOC dont play it IC.


this is a polite conversion Rotku, if any of this is upsetting you i’m sorry and i will try and adjust my posts. the point here is to discuss this topic not argue about it.

[Rotku]

this is a polite conversion Rotku, if any of this is upsetting you i’m sorry and i will try and adjust my posts. the point here is to discuss this topic not argue about it.

Heh, don't worry mate, it takes a lot more to get me upset. I've been around ALFA for enough years that I can put up with people disagreeing with me.

You are right in saying that not everyone can express their skills. That's why, I for one, am very hesitant to give things such as riddles and the likes. However, one does not need to know how to track well IRL to be able to track IG. Nor sneak, swing a sword, throw a dart or what ever.

[johnlewismcleod]

Not everyone can express their stats correctly IC because they don’t have those skills OOC (especially social skills).

A valid point kiyoti...thanks for the reminder. I never even considered playing a female (I'm exceptionally un-feminine in RL) in PnP because of that very thing, and never considered it for many years in NWN either from habit. But one of the exceptional improvements over PnP is that one interacts exclusively via avatar, so a 6'3", 240 pounder like me can actually pull off playing female without causing players to giggle (well, maybe they giggle at me, but I can't hear them ).

That doesn't necessarily translate to bluff/persuade/appraise, etc. skills IG, however, and I for one will try to remember that IG. I'm fairly weak on Faerun lore personally, but my bardess is quite knowlegable, and the reality of this disparity of ability can be embarrassing on occassion IG, but having said that, if we abandon dialogue in favour of rote skill checks, we also abandon the superior medium of our PW that enables such intense RP to be possible.

Food for thought, but I'd have to suggest playing PC's with skills one can simulate with dialogue IG would be best for RP IG, with the caviat that if a player has "brain-lock" and can't think of a witty line to simulate charisma IG (this happens to me more frequently than I'd like to admit, heh), perhaps offer up a volunteer skill check so the other players/DM is aware that your PC has the skill.

While I know DM's (and most players) don't like superfluous, self-administered skill checks as a rule, it might help with the instances you describe.

[NickD]

As an aside...

While I know DM's (and most players) don't like superfluous, self-administered skill checks as a rule, it might help with the instances you describe.

I'm not opposed to them, but don't necessarily expect my character to fall in love with yours because you roll a high diplomacy check or cower in fear because you roll a high intimidate. And don't send me a tell that you are "disappointed in [my] roleplaying" when I don't.

Same goes with being [...] smarter or better looking than we are IRL.

Yes, that's exactly the angle I was going for with my current character.

[dergon darkhelm]

And don't send me a tell that you are "disappointed in [my] roleplaying" when I don't.

I gave up sending you that tell years ago.........didn't help at all.

/me *returns to RPing an 18 wisdom* (yeah right )

[Rotku]

Same goes with being [...] smarter or better looking than we are IRL.

Yes, that's exactly the angle I was going for with my current character.

You pull it off well. Maybe you underestimate your own intelligence?

[Mulu]

That doesn't necessarily translate to bluff/persuade/appraise, etc. skills IG, however, and I for one will try to remember that IG. I'm fairly weak on Faerun lore personally, but my bardess is quite knowlegable, and the reality of this disparity of ability can be embarrassing on occassion IG, but having said that, if we abandon dialogue in favour of rote skill checks, we also abandon the superior medium of our PW that enables such intense RP to be possible.

This issue comes up every time we have a skills discussion here. I for one in general try to play PC's whose skills I can rp when necessary, and when I finally bit the bullet and rolled up a bard on "FR Loremasters" ALFA, I did so knowing it would require me to actually study FR Lore in RL to pull of the PC. Turns out I didn't have to study much.

The general attitude in the past actually has been "don't roll up a PC you can't rp well," for obvious reasons, as the alternative is:

*Says something meaningful about the history of the Silver Marches*
*Roll Lore Check 9+23=32*

and now everyone else has to rp that you actually said something meaningful. It shifts the rp burden to other players and breaks immersion a bit to move to roll play over role play. (Not claiming you would actually do that, just making the example).

Of course, the converse should also be true, don't rp stats or skills you don't have, like solving the logic puzzle with your 8 int cleric or telling a plausible lie with your 6 charisma dwarven fighter. That should go without saying, even if the DM is letting you. Which goes back to making these skill based classes viable and even needed by requiring PC's to actually have the skills. I don't buy the "make the game session go by easier" rationalization. You can always solve problems in other ways. Can't track? Try listening. Can't pick the lock? Bash it open. Can't disable the trap? Eat it and hope the cleric can heal you, or better still let a summons eat it. Can't bluff your way out of a paper bag? Bash him over the head.

And failure should always be an option outside of just combat. The point being made before was if a DM'ed party TPK'ed because none of them had sufficient combat skills to kill a bunny with a spiked club, no one would feel sorry for them or DM kill their enemies just to let the session continue. So why fudge non-combat skills if you aren't willing to fudge combat skills? Because I remember my highly social skilled combat sucky PC getting chased naked and with no weapons by a swarm of giant rats right off a ledge, with a strong warning beforehand by a certain DM that it was highly likely my PC was going to die in the encounter ....

(And it was fun too! )

[Rotku]

Well put, Mulu.

[danielmn]

Now my personal opinion, that is backed by some of the posts here in different ways, is that sometimes, we ignore the chance to fail, and find ways, work around, to allow players to succeed.

How often has this been done that you've seen?

I don't disagree with the fact that rolls shouldn't be fudged for the sake of "progress" whatever that entails, I'm just wondering if this is a big enough problem that it warrents this much of a discussion about it. If Dergon hadn't have posted, would it even be an issue? Are we basing this HUGE problem off of his statements alone, or is there more to it? How prolific, in your play, has the issue been? Or are we making a mountain out of a molehill?

Once more, it comes down to distinguishing weather the "problem" or perception of a problem comes down to just not having enough for skill based classes to do with their skills IG for profit and advancement, or weather the skill based classes are being ignored by dms who are letting PC's fudge rolls. I can testify to the former, and I really could not testify to the latter.