DMFI Dice Rolls

[Scavar]

The only real reason I would roll a Bluff and such, usually it gets looked over and people think I'm rolling for them, is to judge how I should react. Even if you are the words best talker, you aren't perfect all the time, so I think some situations call for it.

As far as lore, you can use it for a bunch of things, usually just for knowledge that isn't common. And for insert roll here, I use that for spot checks on things I do with my journal. I like peoples reactions when they see stuff happen.

[Wyvern76]

How is this fair? Roll against roll, the higher level will win, even if the lower level has built their ENTIRE character concept around being a smooth-talker, or an underhanded, compulsive, social liar. Its just not right. Its one of the reasons people want to level up so fast; they want to be able to invest points in the skills they need to fulfill their character concept, just because that concept can't be fulfilled at a low level, when talking to higher-levels who really only have the IC difference of having smashed more Gnolls than the lower-levels.

See my Thread on the topic of Characters vs IC Reality for my thought on this.

[Machiavelli]

There was a lengthy thread on exactly this a while back (though it only turned into this discussion around page 4 ), and a few of the DMs like GBX weighed in as well, so people might want to have a gander.

http://www.sundren.org/forum/showthr...e+rolls&page=4

[Xanderleo]

I tend to use converstational rolls not very often. I use alot more things like Spot, Heal, Listen and my own stat checks to see if, for instance, Sigrun can resist Josef trying to goad him into combat.

So I generally use them as a guideline for for myself rather than a guideline for another character. I have a rolled intimidate occasionally .. even diplomacy, but neither was meant to dominate a character into doing what I wanted.

[Raksha]

As far as rolls that -you- make, this is more or less something for your discretion. If you're rolling Lore to determine if you know about Asmodeus and his sock drawer, or if you're rolling Heal to try to figure out that someone is actually bleeding internally and is in need of a Heal, or you're rolling a Dex check to lob a pineapple into Kaldahat, this is up to you.

I am of the personal opinion that roll-spam gets very old, very quickly, especially for things such as hide and move silently that are handled by the engine, and correctly now. Or constant rolls on mental attributes to determine what your character is going to say, which makes me want to reach through the screen and choke someone. They are your character and they can make a witty remark without a DC12 INT check. But this is all up to the person.

However. The only person who can actually force someone to DMFI roll is a DM. Anyone else can only suggest, and has no right to become twitchy if you decide not to spam up the chat window. For this reason, I really favor conversation skills and the like being played out completely in text rather than in rolls. True, you can roleplay a persuasive speaker even if you're CHA 8 with no ranks in diplomacy, but then the DM stick will descend on you.

[GodBeastX]

I think that people should be conscious of their skill points in their RP. I usually roll for myself more than the other person. People ask me "Hey, how do I counter that?" I say "I'm just rolling to put it out there, you don't gotta counter, act how you want "

For example, I might roll bluff before I tell a lie, then make up the lie after the roll.

DC: 4

"Uhh... see what had happened was... erm... would you believe it was El'Nino?"

DC: 40

"I did NOT have sexual relations with that WOMAN!" <-- Bill Clinton

[Maevan2]

Doesn't using a dice roll make lies a bit useless? After all you are telling the other "look, i am trying to lie to you but you'll have to believe me anyway because my numbers are better than yours". WTF?

Sometimes a lie might be obvious, sometimes not. But this way you reduce the whole thing to dice rolls and the other player knows that you are lying. I consider this to be some kind of OOC knowledge that i would prefer not to have.

[Cythrawl]

I think that people should be conscious of their skill points in their RP. I usually roll for myself more than the other person. People ask me "Hey, how do I counter that?" I say "I'm just rolling to put it out there, you don't gotta counter, act how you want "

For example, I might roll bluff before I tell a lie, then make up the lie after the roll.

DC: 4

"Uhh... see what had happened was... erm... would you believe it was El'Nino?"

DC: 40

"I did NOT have sexual relations with that WOMAN!" <-- Bill Clinton

I love the way you stress the 'WOMAN' as if that was the lie.

[GodBeastX]

Honestly, the fact is, the PW wouldn't work so well without DMFI dice rolls. I gotta be real with you. Mostly cuz some people don't play for their character's experience in life, they play to win. In a table top session, which is what people are quoting, everyone is buddies, and they usually (usually) get along and concede to each other, and most the time are a party working together.

In PW the rules change. You got massive amounts of anonymous faces that might be working against each other. In a perfect world, people would just RP their attributes (Laughs at that concept), skills, feats and all. However, you get the people who don't play nice and start forcing you to do their bidding. I have seen even people who don't like rolling dice, get frustrated and roll them, almost as if to say "Hey, yeah, yo, I'm right here." Not to mention, we're also typing crap. If everyone was on ventrilo, and you could describe things more, people might be able to react differently. Voice inflection, better description of the situation, helps paint a better picture.

In reality, D&D sucks as a PW medium It really does. And about my lie rolls, that's just the kind of guy I am. I don't care if people know I'm lying, I'd rather people always know I'm lying because reactions are more enjoyable for me than to just be let off the hook. I don't play to win.

[Machiavelli]

Dice rolls are fine in moderation. I use them, but not a great deal. I can't see any problem with applying them occasionally, so long as it's not a constant stream which spams up the chat window, and so long as people don't turn into dice roll Nazis. They can be handy in certain circumstances such as a scuffle, and for things along the lines of Lore and Spellcraft I like to roll them on occasion as well.

[Rhifox]

I used to be vehemently against them (as evidenced by the link Sir Malaclypse put out there), but nowadays I roll them fairly frequently. I don't care if they're taken entirely, and personally won't let the dices always determine success or failure (except on 1s. 1s are awesome because of the random shit you can come up with to show that you botched it). I'm like GBX nowadays, I like to roll just to see how I roll. For instance, whenever I'm trying to be intimidating, I always roll intimidate to show that I'm trying to be (IE, an intimidating stare is different, yet not, from a regular stare). Usually though, said rolls end up being bad for me. :P

[Kangleton]

Hmm. Is there, or could it be implemented, that players can make a roll that is invisible to other people? I've never really tried, so maybe its already possible... but at least then, for example, if I wanted to roll Bluff for MYSELF, I could do just that; and people would be unable to metagame the fact that they OOC know I'm lying, because they saw me roll bluff.

[Sammael]

Not to mention, we're also typing crap. If everyone was on ventrilo, and you could describe things more, people might be able to react differently. Voice inflection, better description of the situation, helps paint a better picture.

That may be true, but I have to say, I think I would very quickly go insane from all the bad voice acting (mine included).

Especially listening to characters with thick accents :shudders:

[Kaldaris]

My main problem lies solely with conversations skills.

Nothing else.

Intimidate; Fine, I can see that being used.

But Diplomacy being used to force a situation? There's no counter to that. If your descriptions can't motivate or convince me, then there's no reason for me to be convinced just because you put some points into a skill.

A bluff skill of 40 being used to make a lie like "There's cake all over your body! Delicious cake.", just doesn't fly. And Bluff is STILL the most irritating skill ever for me to have to deal with, because people roll it all the damn time.

Bluff Mod 20 = 32
Me: What are you rolling bluff for?
Him: So you don't know I'm lying.
Me: I didn't know you were lying until you told me that.

So to reiterate.

It says very bluntly in the Player's Handbook 3.5 that these skills are intended for use against NPC's only.

[Xanderleo]

"There's cake all over your body! Delicious cake."

LOL

I sense ... Kaldaris has had some sort of bad experience in the past relating to this particular bluff.


Good point about Bluff though, if there's no real reason to doubt what the person says, don't bother with the roll; i.e., :

-"What'd you do today"

-"Nothing" Bluff roll = 22

However, if someone is suspicious about something a charcater is saying, like if he's caught stealing and is trying to talk his way out of it, I can see certain circumstances where the roll can sensibly enter play.