Rolls enforcement in RP situations

[Xanthea]

Treat rolls as a guide of how persuasive/diplomatic/intimidating someone is.

A 30+ bluff roll doesn't mean you have to be fooled, it means that the guy told the lie without any visible signs that he was lying.

A 30+ diplomacy roll doesn't mean you have to be persuaded into doing what the guy is asking for, it just means that he's asking very well.

A 30+ intimidate roll doesn't mean you have to cringe in a corner or do whatever he demands. It just means that he is very effective at being scary.

Ideally you'd take their presentation into mind when you decide how to react, but the reaction itself is entirely up to you.

[Ithildur]

You're all a bunch of pansy, unconvincing liars who smell like turnips. I refuse to take anything stated by any of you seriously, and if you try to press your points I will default to hostile and attack you on sight.

[JaydeMoon]

*DM KILL*

I win.

[Veilan]

Of course, the other side of the medal is... don't overplay skills and abilities your character doesn't have. Just because the game engine does not enforce your character's charisma as directly as his strength in combat, does not mean your character is not grossly repulsive, incapable of conversing in common and too dim-witted to notice the connection between rain and his clothes not drying.

Oh, and you also cannot allocate within a stat - apart from skill points. Intelligence 6 really is stupid, not "very stupid, but excels in math" and charisma 8 really is less attractive than the average commoner - in every fashion. If you invest all your points in diplomacy, perhaps people may still let you write speeches for them anyway.

Cheers,

[Blindhamsterman]

another fun fact about stats.

charisma 8/9? isn't grossly repulsive.
intelligence 8/9? isn't an idiot.
strength 8/9? isn't a weakling.

they're all BARELY below average (which is 10 or 11). Just because they're the minimum that points buy allows, doesn't make them the minimum D&D could have. Anyone that RPs any of those stats as such, is doing themselves a disservice, and any DM that forced it would be being pretty unfair.

[Dorn]

charisma 8/9? is very uncomfortable to be around if not grossly repulsive. Either way, you stay here and i'm going over there.

intelligence 8/9? isn't an idiot, but sure is stupid. Which sucks because people feel sympathy for an idiot, but get fed up with someone who's just really stupid.

strength 8/9? is a weakling. If you're 30% weaker than the average..you're a weakling. Lets arm wrestle and see.

Oh, and you also cannot allocate within a stat - apart from skill points. Intelligence 6 really is stupid, not "very stupid, but excels in math" and charisma 8 really is less attractive than the average commoner - in every fashion. If you invest all your points in diplomacy, perhaps people may still let you write speeches for them anyway.

inetersting

So if you want to be the rudest most arrogant sonofabitch out there (char , but quite darkly handsome(char 12) and so imposing that you are almost always remembered for weeks after you leave the room as a scary bastard and people get WELL out of your way wihtout you even trying to intimidate them (char 16) you should pick 13 as an ability score (8+12+15/3) and then fill out the char bio well?

[Mirabai]

BH makes a good point. I don't know that CHA 8/9 is so unattractive it would be uncomfortable to be around the person, unless you were pretty vain and self-centered yourself, or you were a 15 y/o.

10 is average. So in other words, 10 is the vast majority of the world. How do we go from "average" to "repulsive" with just a one or two point drop?

Also, I think it's perfectly reasonable to weigh certain stats in certain areas. A person can be gorgeous to look at but as soon as they open their mouth an ugly personality can literally make them repulsive. I have known people like that. I don't care how good you look on the outside, if you're a nasty piece of work you may as well have a hunchback, hooked nose, and be covered in warts. CHA isn't just about looks. The other stats are a lot more black & white. As for INT I think that's where WIS comes in, if you want to have different "kinds" of smart. Common sense vs book learnin', etc.

[Veilan]

Oh, and you also cannot allocate within a stat - apart from skill points. Intelligence 6 really is stupid, not "very stupid, but excels in math" and charisma 8 really is less attractive than the average commoner - in every fashion. If you invest all your points in diplomacy, perhaps people may still let you write speeches for them anyway.

inetersting

So if you want to be the rudest most arrogant sonofabitch out there (char , but quite darkly handsome(char 12) and so imposing that you are almost always remembered for weeks after you leave the room as a scary bastard and people get WELL out of your way wihtout you even trying to intimidate them (char 16) you should pick 13 as an ability score (8+12+15/3) and then fill out the char bio well?

Emphasis added, sir Dorn!

Skill points are there for the fine tuning - stats are an amalgam, within which you cannot be overly picky. Deficit management certainly is impossible.

[hollyfant]

It's a pity there's no such thing as "negative skillpoints", so that you can really fine-tune the skills to deviate from the base ability. But I s'pose they'd just be minmaxed. By people like me.

[fluffmonster]

Less intelligent than average? Average is pretty dumb, so yes less than average is stupid.

Less charismatic than average? Average is definitely not attractive and has all the personal magnetism of a box of cheerios, so yes less than average is someone other people do not want to be around. On average.

[Blindhamsterman]

so, out of interest, do the folk that feel being a single point below average intelligence consider themselves to be dumb?

or do you all consider yourselves to be above average? I expect average in each stat to be along the lines of the folk I know, and none of them, would I catagorise as stupid, repulsive or weaklings, but equally I don't think many people I know are above average *shrugs*

[Veilan]

The "average" is hardly defined by the sample of a few online gamers spending their time in virtual discussion and roleplaying.

The DnD average is your medieval commoner, and he's more like this:

[dergon darkhelm]

In my tabletop game I liked to tell my players to think of each Int point as 10 IQ point. Not a perfect correllation, but pretty good. An IQ of 100 represents average human cognitive capacity as does an Int of 10.

Extrapolating then you would get:

Int 17 -18 + : Supra-genius
Int 15-16: Genius
Int 13-14: Highly superior Intelligence
Int 12: Superior Intenlligence
Int 9-11: Normal or average intelligence
Int 8 : Dullness
Int 6-7: Borderline retardation ("educatable reatardation")
Int 4-5: Reratardation
Int 3: Profound retardation

[SwordSaintMusashi]

The "average" is hardly defined by the sample of a few online gamers spending their time in virtual discussion and roleplaying.

The DnD average is your medieval commoner, and he's more like this:

The average commoner is not a retarded medieval hick .

A 10 intelligence is average human intelligence for the dungeons and dragons setting. This includes the wagon maker, the man who farms and has to repair his own tools, the local cook. They're just folk. Unfortunately, over the years (on almost every PW I've played on), commoners are brought out to represent this just absolute filth of human life in the setting, when in fact most live moderately comfortable.

There's a difference between a commoner and a covered in dirt peasant serf.

[Killthorne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xd_zkMEgkI

~Killy~