Well, of course out of respect I won't name with whom I had an issue today, but I'd like to get an opinion of the staff on the following matter and how to improve future encounters like this.
My charackter was drawing another PC, who was ok with it and it all ended up with the man, who was drawn, being quite of the evil sort and demanding coin. Even though nothing of the like was stated before in any kind of contract, which my wizard would of course not break for his reputations sake. But that is not the point, as the player and myself engaged in some really interesting rp conversation, which I enjoyed. At one point my char bid his farewell after he could not take much more of the demanding blunt gibberish by the seemingly uneducated, authority abusing char.
With the respectful yet a litle threatening farewell words, my wizard started to walk away rp wise but had to stand there because of the issue of typing text (what my char was saying at that point, was while starting to walk after he gave his farewell PS: my char loves to mumble to himself and finish things cold). So my wizard turned around and started to walk after I entered the lines, which he was rp wise already talking with himself being turned around slowly and stepping his first inches.
Suddenly I read some text *grabs my charackter*. First of, I think he should have rped proberly in writing *tries to grab* and not *grabs* as a finished statement. Second, he rolled some number for hells knows why to most likely bring some force behind the grab. Then again, my char was slowly walking the other way rp wise!
Now I got a private chatmessage of me being a bad rper and being to quick not giving chances for reponseses, even though he had plenty of chances before to try anything more forceful. Once my char was fed up and decided to walk it was all over in my opinion.
Now the player is basically taking me for a bad roleplayer, because of that situation he forced up and where he rped in my opinion not very well himself at the end.
Like I wrote in the first sentence, I am interested in how the staff see's the problem for possible future encounters leading to similiar outcomes.
question regarding an rp situation
-
*[<3]
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
The above example is called 'poweremoting' and includes such things as forcing something on another character without giving a chance to reply or avoid the situation.Kazuya_nb,Oct 10 2009 wrote:
Suddenly I read some text *grabs my charackter*. First of, I think he should have rped proberly in writing *tries to grab* and not *grabs* as a finished statement. Second, he rolled some number for hells knows why to most likely bring some force behind the grab.
All such 'ultimate' emotes are considered VERY bad form to be honest, and lots of people feel OOC-ly subdued by such rp'ers because they assume they have to go along with it or be taken for a bad rp'er.
Actualy, it's the poweremoters or godmodders that suck.
And it is against the rules actualy I think.
Funny enough, it's most often supposedly 'evil' characters who you see resorting to such emotes, the reason simply being the person in question being unable to portray 'evil' in another more effective and atmospheric way. ;)
Notice I use the word 'often' - there's a helluva lot of players out there who portay wonderful evil characters. :)
-
*Raneguin
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Well, in defense of the other person, I will say that it's more natural to just type "grabs" than "tries to grab". But, in a situation like that "tries to grab" is the more acceptable way to go about it. Still, I'm not saying what either of you did was wrong in that sense.
STILL, with the roll he/she/it/toaster was likely rolling to see if they could grab, and wanted a counter roll since it was an action that would have opposition, so depending on what your character did you'd make an opposing roll to escape / beat his roll. Typically. The rules on that can be fuzzy, and change depending who you're RPing with.
So, all of the above are things that are negligable really... usually circumstancial, and I wouldn't dwell on that. In situations like where you don't understand / agree with someone's way of doing it, just talk it out OOCly so there's clarification on how to handle it.
HOWEVER.
Calling someone a bad roleplayer... THAT is bad form.
STILL, with the roll he/she/it/toaster was likely rolling to see if they could grab, and wanted a counter roll since it was an action that would have opposition, so depending on what your character did you'd make an opposing roll to escape / beat his roll. Typically. The rules on that can be fuzzy, and change depending who you're RPing with.
So, all of the above are things that are negligable really... usually circumstancial, and I wouldn't dwell on that. In situations like where you don't understand / agree with someone's way of doing it, just talk it out OOCly so there's clarification on how to handle it.
HOWEVER.
Calling someone a bad roleplayer... THAT is bad form.
-
*Mr_Otyugh
- Posts: 2242
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
As per server rules... autoing is forbidden.wrote:2.3) God-moding/metagaming/autoing
- God-moding is forbidden. (Playing invulnerable/invincible character without reason to be so)
- Metagaming is forbidden. (Using out of character knowledge to gain upper hand of others, such as using information in in character forum stories)
- Autoing is forbidden. (Doing something without giving way to avoid it even if there would be reason to be able to avoid it.)
That said, usually these things can be resolved with simple tell "roll X to see if you succeed" or similar. Like Raneguin said, it is quite common to just say "does it" rather than "attempts to do it", doesn't always mean the other one expects automatic results however, on other hand sometimes it does.
Calling others a "bad roleplayer" is generally uncalled for at any situation... but everyone is entitled to their opinion, although I think in some cases it's better to just shut up :P if someone wants more time to reply then they can roleplay that too... like typing "Wait!" or such, that usually gets great results :P
-
*Abby
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
I find it is hard to type everything out as discriptivly as we'd like in a tense situation, and even thouh he typed "Grabs you," by the fact that he made a roll, he was opening it up to a "counter roll."
Upon beating his roll, you could have said "Avoids being grabbed and runs" or whatever.
One thing ive always noticed with gaming servers in general is that people are usually too quick to condemn others for bad RP, and this isnt meant to anyone specifically... just as a whole. We should always extend others the benifit of the doubt. If you "think" someone might be being a jerk, or might be overlooking something, always assume the innocent approach and reply politley with a suggestion or request more info. Most often you'll find people are happy to clarify what they really meant, or happy to learn if they are doing something improperly to server rules.
That aside, I do feel it is responsible RP to respond to people's dice rolls, so long as those roles are in good taste, not spammed, and there is valid RP to accompany them. If we ignore the dice, then we invalidate that character's skill selection, and just because a skill or feat can't be carried out by the game engine, doesn't mean it shouldn't be respected as any other skill/feat that "is" hard coded, such as hide, move silent or spot.
Ignoring an "intimidate" roll just because you feel your character is brave would be no differant than someone being able to choose to ignore your "hide" skill just because they think their character should be able to spot hidden characters with ease. Afterall, do you think anyone would ever fall victim to the "fear" effect mummies have if it was voluntary? Heck no. The dice keep it real. If you come near a mummy and fail your will save, well.. you panic. If you want a fearless character, pump some points into wisdom, take feats like Iron Will and get appropriate gear.... otherwise you are no braver than anyone else of like-level and ability.
Some like to say, my character has fought demons, why would I be afraid of some pouncy elf just because he has a high intimidate score? Well the answer is, adventurers have enough experiance to know that sometimes danger can come in unexpected forms. Intimidate doesnt mean you are big and scary looking, and it shouldn't be used that way. Remember it is a Charisma based skill.. it means you use your Charisma to give the illusion that you are holding more cards in your hand than you really are. Its a skill hard learned and practiced to make people doubt their ability to contend with you... even if in reality, your a complete wimp.
Someone who is intimidated in convorsation might think you've got a dozen homeys around the corner, or that you have some trick up your sleeve such as a deadly poisoned dagger that causes uncurable genital rot.. or are just more than you seem. They should modify their personality accordingly. Hostile becomes unsure, or neutral. Passive might become afraid. Again, circumstances might modify the opposed check. If you are immune to poison.. that story about the poison dagger might lend you a +10 bonus to your counter-roll (not immune since a dagger to the crotch, poison or not is a pretty grim prospect)... something you can discuss in tells before the rolls are made.
We can't choose to ignore knockdown or disarm or any of the other "combat" abilities, so as this is an RP server, we should neither choose to ignore diplomacy, bluff or intimidate.
That said.... there are limits to these skills. And in an OOC private message, the perameters should be discussed between players. For example, if a crafty bard wants to convince you that the sword he is selling you is +5 when its only +2, you might ask for a circumstance bonus against his bluff check because of your crafting ability, or even designate that you want to oppose the roll with "Craft weapon" instead of a wisdom or bluff check. These things can be agreed upon by players before the actual rolls are made.
Some times, people will come up and say ridiculous things that you know for fact arent true, so no matter what bluff check they roll.. .they arent going to convince you. So.. it has to be within reason. Obvously if some half orc tries to tell me he is just a big elf... Abby won't buy it. Though he might say he's an elf that was cursed and turned into a half orc, in which case maybe a bluff check is relivant.
Sometimes, ill use Abby's heal skill to spot a fake limp and ask the player to use bluff vs. healing instead of spot or bluff as my character has specific training and would know a real limp from a fake one.
Communication is key on an RP server, and we need to make use of "tells" in order to agree on how to proceed in such circumstances.
Anyway... thats my thoughts.
Abby
Upon beating his roll, you could have said "Avoids being grabbed and runs" or whatever.
One thing ive always noticed with gaming servers in general is that people are usually too quick to condemn others for bad RP, and this isnt meant to anyone specifically... just as a whole. We should always extend others the benifit of the doubt. If you "think" someone might be being a jerk, or might be overlooking something, always assume the innocent approach and reply politley with a suggestion or request more info. Most often you'll find people are happy to clarify what they really meant, or happy to learn if they are doing something improperly to server rules.
That aside, I do feel it is responsible RP to respond to people's dice rolls, so long as those roles are in good taste, not spammed, and there is valid RP to accompany them. If we ignore the dice, then we invalidate that character's skill selection, and just because a skill or feat can't be carried out by the game engine, doesn't mean it shouldn't be respected as any other skill/feat that "is" hard coded, such as hide, move silent or spot.
Ignoring an "intimidate" roll just because you feel your character is brave would be no differant than someone being able to choose to ignore your "hide" skill just because they think their character should be able to spot hidden characters with ease. Afterall, do you think anyone would ever fall victim to the "fear" effect mummies have if it was voluntary? Heck no. The dice keep it real. If you come near a mummy and fail your will save, well.. you panic. If you want a fearless character, pump some points into wisdom, take feats like Iron Will and get appropriate gear.... otherwise you are no braver than anyone else of like-level and ability.
Some like to say, my character has fought demons, why would I be afraid of some pouncy elf just because he has a high intimidate score? Well the answer is, adventurers have enough experiance to know that sometimes danger can come in unexpected forms. Intimidate doesnt mean you are big and scary looking, and it shouldn't be used that way. Remember it is a Charisma based skill.. it means you use your Charisma to give the illusion that you are holding more cards in your hand than you really are. Its a skill hard learned and practiced to make people doubt their ability to contend with you... even if in reality, your a complete wimp.
Someone who is intimidated in convorsation might think you've got a dozen homeys around the corner, or that you have some trick up your sleeve such as a deadly poisoned dagger that causes uncurable genital rot.. or are just more than you seem. They should modify their personality accordingly. Hostile becomes unsure, or neutral. Passive might become afraid. Again, circumstances might modify the opposed check. If you are immune to poison.. that story about the poison dagger might lend you a +10 bonus to your counter-roll (not immune since a dagger to the crotch, poison or not is a pretty grim prospect)... something you can discuss in tells before the rolls are made.
We can't choose to ignore knockdown or disarm or any of the other "combat" abilities, so as this is an RP server, we should neither choose to ignore diplomacy, bluff or intimidate.
That said.... there are limits to these skills. And in an OOC private message, the perameters should be discussed between players. For example, if a crafty bard wants to convince you that the sword he is selling you is +5 when its only +2, you might ask for a circumstance bonus against his bluff check because of your crafting ability, or even designate that you want to oppose the roll with "Craft weapon" instead of a wisdom or bluff check. These things can be agreed upon by players before the actual rolls are made.
Some times, people will come up and say ridiculous things that you know for fact arent true, so no matter what bluff check they roll.. .they arent going to convince you. So.. it has to be within reason. Obvously if some half orc tries to tell me he is just a big elf... Abby won't buy it. Though he might say he's an elf that was cursed and turned into a half orc, in which case maybe a bluff check is relivant.
Sometimes, ill use Abby's heal skill to spot a fake limp and ask the player to use bluff vs. healing instead of spot or bluff as my character has specific training and would know a real limp from a fake one.
Communication is key on an RP server, and we need to make use of "tells" in order to agree on how to proceed in such circumstances.
Anyway... thats my thoughts.
Abby
-
*Lost and not Found
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Erm, regarding the grabbing while walking - you know, we got this skill called tumble.
In short:
- The skill is used to avoid those nasty attacks of opportunity caused by moving.
It works in this manner:
*Your Tumble Skill* + *1d20* - Against a DC of 15.
Anyone with 14+ tumble is immune to attacks of oppoturnity caused by moving.
Someone with a tumble score of 0 has about 30% chance to win against the tumble DC.
So in short, if someone tries to grasp you, while your character is moving, all you need to do is to roll tumble and beat the DC of 15.
As for touch attacks:
Attacker: 1d20 + Base Attack Bonus + Strength Modifier + Attack Bonuses
Defender: 10 + Dexterity bonus + Dodge AC bonus + Deflection AC bonus+ Size modifier
Beating the Tumble DC is enough to avoid the touch attack as long as your character is moving. ^_^
As for intimidate:
With three levels of Paladin or with one level of Cleric, (Good Domain), you are immune to fear, magical or otherwise. Thus I'd argue, immune to things like intimidate. :P ;)
Well, I am going to demand quite high intimidate roll to make my Drow to start doubting his own level of skill. Thus, rolling the intimidate roll is likely to just make my drow pissed off and quite willing to shove his blade into the throat of the intimidator.
Of course, to some it will be more easier to use the intimidate succesfully than it will to others. And I do actually request that something intimidating has been actually said.
In short:
- The skill is used to avoid those nasty attacks of opportunity caused by moving.
It works in this manner:
*Your Tumble Skill* + *1d20* - Against a DC of 15.
Anyone with 14+ tumble is immune to attacks of oppoturnity caused by moving.
Someone with a tumble score of 0 has about 30% chance to win against the tumble DC.
So in short, if someone tries to grasp you, while your character is moving, all you need to do is to roll tumble and beat the DC of 15.
As for touch attacks:
Attacker: 1d20 + Base Attack Bonus + Strength Modifier + Attack Bonuses
Defender: 10 + Dexterity bonus + Dodge AC bonus + Deflection AC bonus+ Size modifier
Beating the Tumble DC is enough to avoid the touch attack as long as your character is moving. ^_^
As for intimidate:
With three levels of Paladin or with one level of Cleric, (Good Domain), you are immune to fear, magical or otherwise. Thus I'd argue, immune to things like intimidate. :P ;)
Well, I am going to demand quite high intimidate roll to make my Drow to start doubting his own level of skill. Thus, rolling the intimidate roll is likely to just make my drow pissed off and quite willing to shove his blade into the throat of the intimidator.
Of course, to some it will be more easier to use the intimidate succesfully than it will to others. And I do actually request that something intimidating has been actually said.
-
*Kazuya_nb
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
I thank you all for the amount of provided information and the insights will surely help one day or another. :)
I might like to add another point though, concerning certain Cha based rolls like diplomacy. I am not quite sure how strict the staff is even with the example on intimidate, given by Abby.
If someone rolls a high diplomacy or bluff roll beating whatever counter I may have in store (like a will save or pure intelligence to go cunning through etc.) but can't provide a decent argument or make up a beliveable lie ... I see no point in taking such roll seriously, exspecially seeing that my 2 chars have at least 18 intelligence (way above average in the DnD universe) and fine tuned senses + bluff skills.
I might like to add another point though, concerning certain Cha based rolls like diplomacy. I am not quite sure how strict the staff is even with the example on intimidate, given by Abby.
If someone rolls a high diplomacy or bluff roll beating whatever counter I may have in store (like a will save or pure intelligence to go cunning through etc.) but can't provide a decent argument or make up a beliveable lie ... I see no point in taking such roll seriously, exspecially seeing that my 2 chars have at least 18 intelligence (way above average in the DnD universe) and fine tuned senses + bluff skills.
-
*cryptc
- Posts: 866
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Anything that doesn't get resolved by the game engine directly (like hiding, combat, knockdown, etc) has to be agreed upon by both players involved.
That said, we do encourage players to use skill rolls and figure out creative ways to counter them. If someone refuses to go along with it, then just let it go, they aren't forced to. But try to be reasonable, and play along with it, usually it can lead to interesting situations. Winning every discussion/situation doesn't build character like being tricked by someone.
And finally yes, saying someone is a bad rp'er for not playing along is pretty low. People can make up their own minds, but insulting people is not a nice thing to do.
That said, we do encourage players to use skill rolls and figure out creative ways to counter them. If someone refuses to go along with it, then just let it go, they aren't forced to. But try to be reasonable, and play along with it, usually it can lead to interesting situations. Winning every discussion/situation doesn't build character like being tricked by someone.
And finally yes, saying someone is a bad rp'er for not playing along is pretty low. People can make up their own minds, but insulting people is not a nice thing to do.
-
*Mausman
- Posts: 486
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Kelth (and me ooc as player) witnessed this situation. Sadly on forehand I only could respond to what I saw, which was one player ignoring a check made.
However, I know both players a bit, (not all that well) and I consider both to be top notch rp'ers. One calling another a bad rp ' er is never on.
I kinda always believe in talking it out.
RE: the emote, yes, one SHOULD rp * attempts/tries to grab* followed by the check.....a check CAN fail...lol
I think most people in this thread all said the things I would have to say. :)
hope it will be all well and good
However, I know both players a bit, (not all that well) and I consider both to be top notch rp'ers. One calling another a bad rp ' er is never on.
I kinda always believe in talking it out.
RE: the emote, yes, one SHOULD rp * attempts/tries to grab* followed by the check.....a check CAN fail...lol
I think most people in this thread all said the things I would have to say. :)
hope it will be all well and good
-
*Marek Ovilion
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
I completely agree with Abby's above. Granted Marek is very powerful, yet I abide in most cases of RP. Hell, I've even had a level 5 or so intimidate him with a high intimidate roll. Coupled with the fact that Mareks will is exceptionally high, he just barely made the roll. However, it isn't my right to say "Well Marek is an epic character, he shouldn't have to back down from this guy.", instead it's a duty of sorts to actually go along with the spirit of the moment and pander into this. This allows for everyone to enjoy that brief moment when a known character of strength backed down from an aspiring adventurer.
Each of us wants to be the hero in our own story of the character we made. Well to that I say you're a hero as a player if you cater to the stories of others and not just to your own. The greatest books I found that I've read did not just have one character that I enjoyed reading about, but rather several. Each having a personality strength or flaw that I noted and related to.
This is a poor example, but take Superman for example. He's almost invincible. You know he can't be hurt by bullets. Most mortal men don't scare him. Then take Lex Luthor. Sure he's very cunning, smart and rather charismatic in his own right. He can't fight for crap though. He also has Kryptonite. Now excuse me for saying, but I think the Man of Steel is a little intimidated by Lex, wouldn't you? Sure Lex probably doesn't roll around with a shard of green rock in his pocket everywhere he goes. I bet you Superman's not willing to find out though and in most cases keeps his distance from Lex, now wouldn't you think?
Just my opinion, but if you're going to play "Superman", play him correctly. You have a weakness, every hero does.
Each of us wants to be the hero in our own story of the character we made. Well to that I say you're a hero as a player if you cater to the stories of others and not just to your own. The greatest books I found that I've read did not just have one character that I enjoyed reading about, but rather several. Each having a personality strength or flaw that I noted and related to.
This is a poor example, but take Superman for example. He's almost invincible. You know he can't be hurt by bullets. Most mortal men don't scare him. Then take Lex Luthor. Sure he's very cunning, smart and rather charismatic in his own right. He can't fight for crap though. He also has Kryptonite. Now excuse me for saying, but I think the Man of Steel is a little intimidated by Lex, wouldn't you? Sure Lex probably doesn't roll around with a shard of green rock in his pocket everywhere he goes. I bet you Superman's not willing to find out though and in most cases keeps his distance from Lex, now wouldn't you think?
Just my opinion, but if you're going to play "Superman", play him correctly. You have a weakness, every hero does.