So apparently you can't multiply inside the dice tag. One more time.
x 10 = 20. Frackin awesome. Good thing I can't use armor.
Search Posts
...Drop
bonus total=+9 Looking at playing a Gnome Sorcerer Djinni Bloodline.
Something isn't right there. If I say that my Int 3 character knows there is a BBEG -- or at least some villains, somewhere -- when I fail the check, do they magically disappear and we win the game? I would say no. Even a busted clock is right twice a day. Your character essentially guessed and was correct. So the DC was so low that a 3 actually succeeded. You've touched on what I see as another failing of the game, or at least of the way people tend to play it. I accept that a player should know when they succeed or fail at a physical action. I have a problem with knowing success/failure based on the die roll, for sensory/knowledge checks. E.g. You check for secret doors and roll a 2. You the player know you failed but your character should believe that no secret door exists rather than think they can't find one but they suspect one is present. This extends to your fellow players who often wait to see the result of your roll before declaring that their characters will give it try. What I would give for a table that concealed players rolls from other players, but not the GM. Sorry if this is a bit tangential to the original post.
I certainly did not intend to impart the idea that players should be playing against each other as one would in a poker game. The player skills and collaboration I see would be more akin to basketball, where the players are all on the same team and GM/monsters are on the other team. While team members collaborate to win a victory, the individual skill of each member matters. I agree with your statement regarding underpinnings. I just believe that the trust and communication should flow from the player through the pc to the other pcs and their players. Yes, some level of abstraction is required. But, where possible, I tend to reduce or remove the abstraction.
I'm opposed to telling a player that his character couldn't come up with a brilliant plan because of a low INT. I know there have been times in my life where I have been pleasantly surprised by the suggestion of a dimwit. I think this type of situation would be represented in-game by a critical success. So automatically dismissing (no roll allowed) the actions of a pc because his stat is too low, doesn't account for such instances. The problem comes in when the low INT pc suggests the brilliant plan and the necessary action to carry out the plan is then handed off to a more suitable pc, thereby getting around any negative modifier from the low INT pc. In this situation, I would impose a lost-in-translation modifier to the roll of the more suitable pc, carrying out the action. Also, I absolutely hate the group-think method. I.e. Players discussing options ooc and then attributing the plan to the high INT character. IMHO this breeds meta-gaming, discourages rp and diminishes the role of the individual at the table. I see this all of the time when other players suggest more advantageous tactics during another player's turn in combat. Play your pc and let others play theirs. I guess what it comes down to is whether or not the skill of the player actually matters. In all other games (poker, basketball, monopoly, etc...), personal skill determines how well you play versus others. Are RPGs so different that personal skill should have no bearing on the game?
Whether you should enforce characters stats in rp is an old argument that is usually argued from the perspective that player has a higher stat than his character. e.g. I'm smarter than my character who has a 7 INT. (At least I hope I am. ;) And taking that perspective means that the player has control of the rp and can limit the thoughts/statement/actions of his character. But what happens with the reverse is true? When the character is smarter/wiser/more charismatic than the player. How can you possibly enforce the obnoxious boob at the table to rp a charismatic paladin according to his stat?
I agree and disagree with this statement. It seems ridiculous to think that at character with a 7 strength would default to strength-based approaches to solving their problems. E.g. A portcullis is down, the character's first instinct shouldn't be to try and lift it. Instead, finding a way around or bribing someone to open it, would be more congruent with the character's makeup. That said, I have a problem with certain stats. While you can mechanically separate INT and WIS, in reality, WIS is a factor of INT. You're not going to ever meet an extremely low INT individual that is capable of making good judgements, primarily because they lack the basic faculties to assess what their senses are telling them. The usual retort to this statement is something along the lines of "well hs has common sense, just not book smarts." But INT is not about book smarts or even knowledge. It's about the ability to learn and apply reason. WIS is basically the ability to apply valuation to the reason. i.e. Is this a good idea or not. However, I think we all know someone who is extremely bright that seems incapable of thinking about consequences. The game, however, allows for a low INT high WIS character, which introduces an impossible rp situation. My main problem with forcing players to rp stats is that there isn't a good scale for what is acceptable per stat per value. What is the difference between a 7 and 8 INT, or 7 and 12 INT? I absolutely hate it when someone tells me that my character wouldn't have thought of something I stated in-character. If a roll can be applied to a character's action brought about by an idea, then let the character's stat stand on its own. I.e. I may say something that is completely correct (science/logic-wise) that is way over my characters INT of 7. Instead of stating that I wouldn't think of that, apply my INT mod to the a roll to see if I pull the action off successfully. If anything, I would ask players to develop a persona for their characters and then encourage consistency in their rp for that persona.
Hey, Aard was kind enough to send me an invite to the game. I look forward to mixing it up with y'all. Here are my rolls:
I guess this works. 15, 15, 14, 14, 13, 10
Why the 10 post needed before creating alias rule?
Gotta up my posts counts so I can create an alias. 10 posts rule just creates congestion. I'm sure Freakenomics covered this incentive somewhere.
Charlie Scholz is banned because he cares too much.
I'm game. Looking at playing a churlish Half-Orc Seeker (recon scout). Actually, Half-Orc does not work particularly well. Changing to Human w/ choose 2 stats +2 - lose extra skill. Will post character later tonight.
I'm game. Looking at playing a churlish Half-Orc Seeker (recon scout). |