David:
> Hmm, the fact that RuneQuest had such rules was one of the things that
> attracted me to it. I might want to play a character who's better at
> haggling than I am --
> It's really no different from the Cowboys & Indians problem (apologies if
> something different is played in Europe -
I think kids go more for cops and robbers here... but I know what you mean.
And... I admit that in our games (when run by me, or the people in whose campaigns I play) the character's skills are used, but mostly as a "safety net"... If the player's character is a spoken word agent, and in a discussion the player let's slip something that propably will give away the characters cover identity, the GM will probably say something like "I don't think Lucius would have said that... roll some dice, let's see if you get a fumble... and if you do then the slip-up really happened). But it's not as black and white as that, If I was the player in quiestion, and I tought my character was tired or confused enough, then I would probably want the slip-up to stand as it happened without any die rolling. But I really don't like using digital (succes / failure) die rolls to determine the outcome of such situations. People are more fey and complex than that... besides, what is left to roleplay if one starts to run the mental and social skills of the character by game mechanics?
more later, parhaps
-Adept
"thinker, dreamer and adventurer"
Powered by hypermail