Results 61 to 90 of 104
-
2022-10-31, 01:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Wyoming
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Honestly, as I read the thread I am surprised how many people have the GM narrate results rather than the players!
I am surprised by that.*This Space Available*
-
2022-10-31, 01:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Not everyone wants to run a game where a check is inherently a narrative mechanic. DMs are free to describe the outcomes and consequences of a check in terms of a character or anything in the game world. Players, if it's not a narrative game, don't. That means if they describe outcomes at least, they're limited to outcomes related to something their character did right or wrong.
And even then, it's very hard to restrict an outcome to the character only, because they're usually trying to affect the game world.Last edited by Tanarii; 2022-10-31 at 01:40 PM.
-
2022-10-31, 01:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- Corvallis, OR
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
That's what fits (in 5e at least) the most basic game loop:
Originally Posted by 5e PHB Ch 1, How to Play
DMs may delegate parts of step 3 to the player (a la "how do you want to do it?"), but that's still fully subject to their ultimate authority and responsibility for the description and the narration.Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.
-
2022-10-31, 02:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Wyoming
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Thanks for sharing this and that explains a lot of how many D&D players have been conditioned to play TTRPGs.
It is amazing to me how much the initial TTRPG experiences shape how players see the "right and wrong" ways to play TTRPGs. Instead, it is mostly learned behavior and preference. Fascinating.*This Space Available*
-
2022-10-31, 03:40 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Yes, it's a conditioned thing. But from my experience, it's also what the vast majority of players want. They generally don't want to control the world. They want the GMs to tell them what happens when they try to do something. Because as everyone has GMd knows, it's a lot of mental overhead.
It's not global, and it's not universal even within those that generally want outcomes and consequences handled by the GM.
Anyone who has GMd should be able to handle a narrative game. That doesn't mean they all want to, sometimes they need a break from it. But I'd expect they'd be more inclined to it, since their "conditioning" allows them to do it.
And even those players that generally want to have the GM handle outcomes and consequences will often presuppose the success and effect when declaring an action, as opposed to just stating their intent and approach.
-
2022-10-31, 04:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2022
- Location
- GitP, obviously
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
I pretty much agree with most of what you’ve said here, but this small part about players not wanting any control of the world doesn’t really feel right.
I do think that most players are comfortable with this discussed sequence and outcome, but also than that (especially new players) don’t really know how to make their mark without stepping on the DM’screativityproverbial toes.
I specifically had a problem with this when I first started (and several other areas; I was a craptastic new player).Something Borrowed - Submission Thread (5e subclass contest)
TeamWork Makes the Dream Work 5e Base Class Submission Thread
-
2022-10-31, 04:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
While I'm fine playing narrative games with shared world control, my default assumption is the GM controlling the world while the players control their PCs. And more often that not, that's what I'm looking for, because exploring the fictional world is one of my fun-sources in TTRPGs, and exploring something that you yourself are creating isn't really the same.
That said, I think most people assume their character's success at simple actions ("I shout 'enough excuses!' and kick open the door!" vs "I attempt to shout 'enough excuses!' ... *wait for response* ... and then try to kick open the door.") because rollback is preferable to awkward pausing there.
And for that matter, a lot of actions are phrased as completed with the understanding that the GM will treat it as an attempt. For example:
Player: "I leap off the balcony and drive my spear into the dragon from above." (rolls a miss)
GM: "You land squarely on the dragon, but your spear glances off its steel-like scales, barely leaving a scratch."
Even though that's technically not phrased as an "attempt", most people would read that as a normal interaction, rather than as the player declaring that their attack must hit.Last edited by icefractal; 2022-10-31 at 04:46 PM.
-
2022-10-31, 05:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Yes exactly. And if you're not careful as a DM, or as a player in a narrative game, those declarations of assumed success lead to an assumption that if the roll fails, it's because of some (hilarious) blooper on the characters part.
Ideally before calling for a check, a GM should known the Intent and Approach based on the players declaration, and know the Outcomes and Consequences of success/failure (and possibly critical success/failure, or incremental success, etc). But of course we don't always do that. Half the time we're winging it, because players declare the damndest things.
-
2022-10-31, 05:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- Corvallis, OR
- Gender
Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.
-
2022-11-01, 10:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
I wonder if everything that's said after the dice hit the table is considered part of the "results" or not. Because a player describing how their character smashes down the door with a headbutt is different than a player describing what they see on the other side of the now smashed door.
Consider the following example:
Player: "I want to jump the chasm."
DM: "Ok, roll Acrobatics."
*nat 20*
DM: "Crit success"
Player: "I do a backflip across to show off to the other party members."
DM: "After landing safely on the other side, you see..."
Would anyone here consider that the player narrating the results? The player still doesn't have any control over the game world, only over their character.
-
2022-11-02, 03:41 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
-
2022-11-02, 05:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
In the case of diplomacy, it'd usually make more sense for the GM to describe the outcome rather than the player, because although it's a roll for the player it's really the NPC's reaction that's relevant - the same speech could convince one person but not another.
And I find that it's usually not necessary to assume the PC did anything stupid when they fail, it's just that the person they're trying to convince is too cautious/suspicious/stubborn, or happens to be unreceptive to them in particular. I guess if they rolled extremely badly that could represent a notable screw-up.
The roll can really be considered as a guide for how to interpret their argument as the NPC. Enough to make them friendly? Interpret things in a positive light, ignore mistakes when possible, etc. Low, they're unfriendly or even hostile? Assume anything they say is potentially a lie, and that they may well be fools or have ill intent.Last edited by icefractal; 2022-11-02 at 05:37 AM.
-
2022-11-02, 07:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Last edited by KorvinStarmast; 2022-11-02 at 07:19 AM.
Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Worksa. Malifice (paraphrased):
Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
b. greenstone (paraphrased):
Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society
-
2022-11-02, 07:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
So… while I agree in the general case, I don’t actually agree for “ideal”. IMO, in the idea circumstance, the GM needn’t know the Intent at all, and can simply run game physics on the stated actions, and get to be surprised at the results. “Down, Down, Up, B? But that’s the standing backflip. Why would you want to do a standing back flip at the edge of the chasm?”
-
2022-11-02, 09:19 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
I disagree with that, simply because no game system has fine enough resolution to really handle that level of detail.
I mean, that works great for situations that match up with the "arrow model" of action resolution - the PC has a lot of uninterrupted control of the setup of the action, they perform some action, and then some result unfolds.
Lots of actions - maybe most - aren't like that. If you're trying to grapple someone near a cliff, for instance. Maybe you want to toss them off a cliff, maybe you don't. Either way, lots of things are happening during the resolution of that action, and the ultimate intent of the character is going to impact those things. No system can really capture all of those little things... perhaps one could give the player control over what results they get, but these systems are also accused of being "meta".
Conversations, especially, are exchanges. They're a back and forth. You say stuff, see how people respond, and then adjust to get closer to your desired outcome.
The only real reason that I can see, for any practical use, to prefer not declaring your intent is if you are presuming an adversarial GM and deliberately want to hide information from the GM."Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"
-
2022-11-02, 10:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Wyoming
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Excellent point about "exchanges" and conversations. That is what goes on when you let a player narrate results, but the GM has ultimate say in setting the final reality.
Here is how it has worked for me in the past. *Long winded example ahead*
Player: I want to jump the chasm.
GM: Great, that is an acrobatics check
Player: <Rolls dice> I got a 17
GM: That is a success.
Player: Great, I step back a few feet, take a running start, and leap across the chasm with a single stride. When I get to the other side, I attach a rope and throw it back across to my team on the other side.
GM: Great, you do manage to leap across the chasm. However, when you get to the other side, you slide on the loose rock and barely manage to keep your feet. So, you want to look for a place to secure a rope?
Or:
Player: <Rolls dice> I got a 9.
GM: That is a failure.
Player: Urgh, I do not want to fall into the chasm. Ummm.... I guess a I take a few steps back, start my run, but just as I get ready to jump I loose my nerve and pull up. I tip toe to the edge and look over the edge, and then say, "Heck no am I jumping that" as I point down.
GM: Ha, ha. Nice. Okay, you lurch to a stop just before getting to the edge. However, your momentum carries you a bit too far, and your torch falls from you hand and down into the blackness below..... and it keeps falling.
Player: "Heck no am I jumping that!"
GM: Great, now what?*This Space Available*
-
2022-11-02, 10:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
I would hardly consider that a downside, but my tastes aren't universal.
I will say though, I don't think it means you always have to. If the player doesn't have any additional input on how their character jumps the chasm, they just keep quiet and the GM goes straight into describing the other side. Similarly, if the player doesn't want to describe their character's failures, the GM can go straight into describing the consequences.
I 100% agree with this. Actions are "inputted" through language, which is famously vague and imprecise. The "Game Physics" are handled by peoples' imaginations, and sometimes some math. It's never going to be a purely deterministic system because people are inconsistent creatures.
Understanding the player's intent is important to cover the gaps between what the player meant by the words they said, and what the GM assumed those words meant. Same thing in reverse for the game world.
-
2022-11-02, 11:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Deliberately want to hide information from the GM? Definitely. Adversarial GM? Not so much.
Explaining how I’m moving troops, I don’t tell the GM that I left my left flank exposed (or whether I did so on purpose); I let them roleplay the opponents’ reaction. (The GM in question actually pointed out my “error”, and I just smiled in response, and did not take the opportunity they gave me to change my declared actions. Good times.)
In a conversation, I don’t tell you whether I said something “stupid” to check whether you were paying attention, to evaluate whether you’re the type to correct me (and how), as a way to ask your opinion on the topic, because I misspoke, because it’s secretly not as dumb as it sounds, or because I really am just that dumb. I just take the “say something stupid” action, and you respond accordingly, in ignorance of my intent.
Cris Johnson certainly didn’t tell Liz Copper that he let himself get beat up on purpose, let alone why.
So, no, I don’t feel that stating “Intention” is part of optimal play. If your GM is good enough, actions can speak louder than words about those actions. But I otherwise agree that it’s good in the general case.Last edited by Quertus; 2022-11-02 at 12:00 PM.
-
2022-11-02, 12:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Even if you had a game system that was detailed and precise enough to actually just handle "input" sufficiently, and it was still fast enough to actually work, then it would end up requiring players to basically become experts in each skill (oh, I want to make this guy go down without moving further, which exact grab and takedown should I use, again?)
Though, the PbtA-esque "okay, you succeeded, here's some options for what that means" is an interesting option as well. But a lot of people seem to feel that's narrative/meta/whatever for some reason. I think there's this idea that the "arrow model" of task resolution is actually an ideal universal model. And I just find it lacking."Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"
-
2022-11-02, 07:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
-
2022-11-02, 09:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
-
2022-11-02, 11:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- Corvallis, OR
- Gender
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
TTRPGs are not and cannot be chess. They are utterly different both conceptually and operationally. For one thing, the DM is not the opponent of the players. Not even when he is voicing the antagonists.
Beyond that, chess has implied intent and closed rules (every possible interaction is defined in the rules and anything else is forbidden). Neither of those apply to a TTRPG.
I reject the relevance of the analogy.Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.
-
2022-11-03, 02:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
"I take out my whittling knife and one of the logs and craft a..."
Of course you often need intent. Or do you think, having detailed description of the log and every knife move and requiring both player and GM to have deep knowledge about whittling and properties of wood and wasting an hour of game time on details no one cares about would really be more ideal ?
Rules tend to maintain a level of abstraction for good reasons. But that always also means that certain very different actions and different circumstances are handled the same rules-wise. And that different outcomes are also handled the same rules-wise (most crafting rules e.g. only care for price and quality if you have the needed materials and tools). Intend is necessary to decide what actually happens.
-
2022-11-03, 05:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
Sigh. “Often” is not “always”. Never considered the possibility that I was being pedantic, and claiming that I considered it “optimal” when we were at those exceptions? Because the post I was referring to referenced “optimal”, and I said I agreed in the general case, just not in the optimal case.
You know, there’s a habit on these boards to find any difference between the example and the reality, and use that to reject the example, without actually demonstrating that the difference is relevant, or that the example isn’t still applicable. It’s like the thought version of an ad hominem.
And I already gave another example, of “I told you how I deployed my troops, I don’t need to point out that I left my left flank open, or whether it was by Intent, for you to roleplay the opposition, do I?”
Given that that was an RPG, by all means, prove how ”I moved units” is substantially different from the chess example of “I moved units”, and that therefore your rejection of the chess example is valid. I’ll wait.
-
2022-11-03, 10:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
There are some people that want RPGs to be, effectively, Chess, and to remove any interpretive role of the GM. They believe that any time the GM has to interpret/make a ruling/etc. is a failure case of the game.
Often, they accept that GM rulings are necessary given the current state of technology and time to run a game, but fervently desire that to not be the case.
I'm.... not one of those people."Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"
-
2022-11-04, 04:48 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
If the task is "giving an order to a military unit", the corresponding Intent is that the unit does what you want them to. A failure judged against that Intent would be the unit somehow misinterpreting your orders (e.g., by charging the wrong guns) or the unit refusing to carry them out.
There might be a call for another check later, depending on the complexity of whatever you have planned for that flank.Last edited by lesser_minion; 2022-11-04 at 04:52 AM.
-
2022-11-04, 05:43 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
-
2022-11-04, 06:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
In such a situation as GM i would still make sure there is no misunderstanding if a player seems to do something such risky. Additionally, if the character had high enough warfare skill (or rolled high enough), i would explicitly warn him that the left flank would be open if he did so.
That is very different from chess, even if the rules handled unit movement pretty clearly.
-
2022-11-04, 06:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
In this context, 'task' is the specific thing you're rolling for, not the bigger objective you're doing that thing in support of. If you defined the task as "winning a war", your table wouldn't concern itself with specific troop movements or even battles -- it'd just be an opposed strategy check against the enemy faction and then you'd narrate the victory of whoever rolled higher.
Intent is literally just "this is what I want to achieve with this specific dice roll". Without it, there is no way to determine what success and failure mean. It's true that you don't always need it, but the results aren't always good. For example, "I jump over the chasm to the ledge" -- natural 20 -- "That's a 45, so you land gracefully on the far side, completely avoiding the spiked wall behind it. What do you want to do next?" vs. "I jump over the chasm to the ledge" -- natural 20 -- "That gives you a jumping distance of 40 feet, which is far further than the width of the chasm and the ledge, so you slam face-first into the spiked wall behind it and die horribly. Roll a new character."Last edited by lesser_minion; 2022-11-04 at 07:19 AM.
-
2022-11-04, 08:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: Social Skills: Roll, then Role Play
That’s your good, and was the good of the GM in question.
The difference there is that the entirety of “Chess” is encapsulated by the board state, whereas, in an RPG, communication and (theoretically) shared mental landscapes are involved. So the “checking for misunderstanding” is a property of how they differ; whereas “not needing to explain Intent” is a property of how they’re similar.
The results of comparing the troop movements apply a bonus or penalty to the “results of the war” roll?