The party "face", the guy with the highest charisma, is either a totally aspie or cringe incarnate

>the party "face", the guy with the highest charisma, is either a totally aspie or cringe incarnate

post shit you really hate about groups you've played with. I feel compelled personally to play the face role since I don't want one of these clowns doing it.

>the party "face", the guy with the highest charisma, is either a totally aspie or cringe incarnate
show us where he touched you

>The party face is the DMs GF that gets away with a bunch of shit that the other members of the party couldn't even dream of.
also
>Party face is bard who tries to do everything. Not just assisting, like trying to outdo the fighter when combat starts, outdo the ranger and druid when it comes to survival etc.

can bards outdo other classes like that?

story faggot

>party barbarian dump stats his INT to get more STR
>time to plan a caper!
>barbarian is suddenly Ocean's Eleven, lays out an intricate heist plan before the social characters get a word out edgewise

If you have issue with this you may not grasp that RP is about being something you can't be in reality.

For some that's being a wizard, others a burly fighter or a half dragon demigod. Some just want to be less shy for a few hours a week.

In my group I am the smartest player and everyone knows it. When ever there is anything involving a puzzle or what the party should do they all look at me. I've even purposely voted for absolutely terrible ideas and every other player immediately voted with me assuming I knew something they didn't. It honestly feels like I'm player a 1 on 1 game but some how I have four characters instead of one.

5e bards keep getting expertise so even if they don'y have twenties they keep getting that double proficiency bonus on whatever skill they choose. It's nice but she tries to take over fucking EVERYTHING. And she's playing one of those "I don't wear clothes all the time, because my character is free." people. Also she was dead set on starting a relationship with someone in the party and having sex with them. It's fucking cringy sometimes

>cringelord decides to sex it up with an npc and horrifically describes what he wants to do to her

fucking hell dm, keep it pg-13 and just fade to black...

>Arcane spell casters are always stuck up cunts but gets downed in ten seconds because tney always dump health stats
>Lawful stupid
>Chaotic stupid

Dm keeps adding players in right now we are at 8 people. Combat against 5 creatures took fucking hours. We're level 13 and earned that, we started at level 1 and then she just adds in one of her friends from college who hasn't played before. I get she's trying to be nice but throwing someone in at level 13 just cheapens the journey for the rest of us.
Am I justified or am I acting like a faggot?

Group size, you're justfied. That's too big.

Waaaah dey got lebbeled up to be able to contribute, is no fair!!!!
In case it wasn't clear, in that regard you're whining cunt.

>me and my 4 friends
>only me and one other actually seriously role play.
>Unfortuntaely, we are the only 2 who can DM.
Of the other 3:
>one is permenately biwildered and constantly asks everyone else what he should do
>one is total aspie that sits on his laptop inbetween turns, and powergames
>the other only ever plays variations of Chaotic Evil, constantly tries to steal everything, kill friendly npcs for giggles.

>RP is about being something you can't be in reality

What I'm talking about is people who can't even enact their fantasy.

>groups haggling down a merchant, trying to hawk off some Behir parts
>merchant's a dwarf, super super hardballing us
>nobody in the party, sans the 18 charisma bard, has any CHA over 12, and maybe like two people have CHA based skill proficiencies in any way
>DM suggests that the Bard try to persuade the Merchant
>"Uhh... I'm going to roll to persuade him..."
>DM tries to get the player to actually even attempt to play his character, asks him what his character says
>"uhh... I'll ask him to buy our stuff.. "
>rolls mediocre and the DM just lets us win because it was clear the guy wasn't going to get it moving

This guy isn't new. Been playing since 3rd edition. It's been like this the whole game.

Everyone else plays their fucking character, talks in character etc. This guy just sits there and rolls, but HE himself claimed that he would be the party's face when we were making characters.

What I'm saying is that you shouldn't play a character you couldn't even hope to actually play. If anyone else in the party was the Bard this campaign would be 2x as good, the Bard has literally never once deceived, performed, intimidated, or persuaded anything in our favor without the DM handing it to him on a plate just because he rolled well.

I just really hate this guy's style of play, it's all dice. Doesn't even try.

What confuses me even more is that the guy says Bards are his favorite class, next to Warlocks, so he's clearly been in this role before. I don't think it's a manner of him feeling uncomfortable with the group as we all know eachother from shit.

rude

Fair enough

>People who can't enact their fantasy
I'm sorry, I can't cast fireball.

You have a shy player, don't be such an ass. I don't ask Barbie players to smash down doors with their cocks even if their character can.

Is that what Barbie does nowadays?

>Complain when enemy NPCs flee the field of battle when it looks like they're losing, because it "steals loot and XP" from them.

I have literally banned people for this and they STILL show up at my table and complain that I dare to have bandits and goblins and whatnot show an ounce of self-preservation instead of flinging themselves on the blades of the "heroes" to give them enough dosh to buy a brothel or some shit.

That, and it's cousin problem, because of shit like this, I make it very clear that I award XP for encounters and besting them, not for particular combat results. If you fight and they flee, you get just as much XP as you do if you butchered them all. Hell, you'll get the XP if you talk your way around them, sneak past them, maneuver them into fighting another group of enemies, knock yourself out.

I'd say roughly 1 in 3 don't listen to this spiel and still whine when enemies get away because they've lost XP.

It's the current year. If Barbie wants to break down doors with her cock, she has every right to.

They have a point with regard to treasure though.

I hate that I recognise that.

That is in no way the same thing and you know it, don't bullshit just because you identify with captain sperg.

He's a detriment to the game, plain and simple. On top of his other bullshit he's a grade A munchkin, actually interrupts players on their own turns to tell them what the best thing to do is. He tried to get the fighter to go battlemaster instead of EKnight because abloo bloo EKnight doesn't do as much damage, I swear he almost had a meltdown when the fighter told him he didn't give a shit

Thinks he's the party leader, despite never actually doing anything. Will 100% lock the game down whenever any sort of decision is to be made because he needs to find the optimal choice. Tries to take any and ever magical item for himself even when it's something like "Mr. Barbarian this shield holds the crest of your ancestral tribe" I've talked to two of the other guys in the party and they can't stand him either, the DM is being a good DM and staying impartial but you can always tell that the poor guy is so exasperated trying to throw this dude a bone

We'd confront him but we're all pretty sure he would actually explode if called out on his shit. Grown-ass 28 or so year old man who is mentally 12

>Fuck off if you have empathy
Fair enough.
I'm sorry you have to deal with a weird Person That Isn't You acting in a way that confuses you.

Honestly, I think you're taking shit way too serious and exagerating how bad he is. You might have led with all these other supposed behaviours.

It's just a game brah.

>the party "tank", the guy with the highest strength and constitution, is a scrawny nerd who can't even do a pull-up
>the party "wizard", the guy with the highest intelligence, is a dumbass who can't do the differential equations I give him every time he wants to cast a spell
>the party "rogue", the guy with the highest dexterity, can't block the airgun pellets I shoot in his face every time he's attacked in-game
cringe

wut?

Why does it bother you specifically?
Would wheelchair-bound cripple playing nimble rogue rustle your jimmes as well?

He's mocking the OP.
Obviously.

If being suave and eloquent in real life is a prerequisite for playing Charisma-based characters, then the other stats should be held to the same standard.

I actually agree with the OP that aspie's shouldn't be the "face" of the party

I actually agree with the OP that muggle's shouldn't be the "wizard" of the party

Calm down if you can't roleplay it then you shouldn't roleplay it. This dude's been given the chance and he can't do it, it's that simple

Hello OP.

No you ding dong, they shouldn't. Roleplaying game literally consists of words and numbers. We can model conversation around the table just fine, so really, being a fucking autist playing a part face hurts the game in a way that being a skinny nerd playing a strong fighter doesn't.

Sorry you are an aspie

Depends on the amount of aspergers.

If the player literally doesn't do anything but roll and half-assedly describe his actions, yes they probably shouldn't be the face. But they shouldn't be roleplaying at all, either.

But if the player at least makes an attempt to roleplay, it doesn't matter how eloquent they are or how well they present their points. That's why social rolls are there. Just try to be in character.

Well, you don't need to be suave and eloquent to come up with something more than "I roll the dice."

Strength characters can use their strength creatively, rather than just trying to solve the problem by swinging a sword at it. Wizards can use magic in creative ways if the system allows for it. Rogues can think of more to do than sneak-stabbing.

The issue is not that he's not king of the debate club or writing award-winning poetry, but that he can't think of anything to get himself out of a paper bag. He's not being held to standards above that of non Charisma-based characters, he's being held to exactly the same.

Being capable of empathising with another person doesn't mean you're literally the same as that person. Are you autistic?

Why? You don't have to do a pull up to play a fighter, but you do have to talk to play a face

Why even have social mechanics?

>player decides to take the role of being the party face, creates an extremely charismatic character
>never speaks or interacts with anyone unless spoken to
>there are anons on Veeky Forums who defend this behavior

I thought this was strange initially, but then I realized the one or two people in this thread are probably aspies identical to the person OP is complaining about.

>Fighters can do more than roll
>Wizards can do more than roll
>Rogues can do more than roll
>Diplomancers MUST do more

Then they didn't earn the loot, did they?

The GM makes loot available, it is the player's responsibility to go and put in the work to get it. If they meet with incomplete success then they get a reduced amount.

Admittedly, sometimes the goal is not to slaughter all the goblins, and simply to drive them off. But there are tradeoffs to being merciless assholes who slaughter their enemies to the last surrendering or fleeing combatant, too.

To determine the effectiveness in scenarios where marginal details would make a difference in the outcome (or how great/poor the outcome is). In my experience having done both, a game where conversations are determined entirely by rolling is just a worse experience, and a player that can't find interesting ways to use his charisma bonus can be a burden for a group

>tfw diagnosed aspie
OP is in the right imo.

>you do have to talk to play a face
"I roll Persuade and take 10."

If you're talking about systems that don't have inherent mechanics for this, then it boils down to how DM houserules them.

Had this before, but then he'd end every plan with "AND THEN WE HIT IT WITH A ROCK."

Nothing in the OP indicates the "problematic" player never speaks or interacts with everyone, and the sentiment is often brought up against people who make attempts to roleplay but have the gall to play a face without being able to do a song and dance routine and otherwise live up to Veeky Forums's entirely overinflated roleplaying standards.

Wow that was really great rollplaying in a game that is about rollplaying.

>roleplaying game
>made to roleplay your fantasy
>someone can't actually roleplay their character and instead sits there contributing nothing as a vital member of the group
>nobody else can do this person's job because they insisted they would be capable

I'm all for the socially retarded getting a chance to act like they have social graces but from the sounds of it this guy isn't even putting any effort into actually trying to play out his supposed fantasy. In this case it (at least in the way it has been presented) is an utter detriment to the party.

I'd be mildly unhappy with someone playing Olaf the Deathbringer if he did nothing but roll a basic attack when he was told, rather than busting down doors and shit like you'd expect. But that's alright because it's just someone wasting their character's potential. The problem is when the character's potential is necessary to fulfill the party's needs.

An example would be a more political intrigue focused campaign. Someone is a high level thief or spy, and they never try to get dirt on the party's enemies, never try to sabotage hostile plots, never steal vital items or even try to frame their opponents. If everyone else made characters as nimble as a bag of wet sand or as subtle as a sack of bricks because this person claimed the rogue role as their own, it's not at all unreasonable to be unhappy about it.

That's why I personally dislike it when aspies try to play social characters. They often don't know how to so much as try to apply these skills, and so they just sit there being a waste of space when they should be contributing. I've met some really shy people who managed to come out of their shell playing a bard, and that was great. I just think some people should not continue to play a social butterfly when it becomes clear they are incapable of doing so.

Seconded. Numbers are helpful in some ways but boring if it's the only thing on which you rely. Also that's why I detest the idea of "social combat" as a system in itself. It's literally unplayable because it takes away the very core of the game and leaves it to the numbers.

But if we're talking D&D, we usually are let's face it, CR assumes correct wealth by level progression when fighting harder monsters.

Denying loot the encounter is designed to give nerfs players.

It doesn't take much to add it to a later haul. It's what I do.

I bet you have a lot of great roleplaying stories

I think anyone should be able to play what they like, but not being able to string together a proper sentance and just letting stats make you persuasive kills immersion. It makes much of the rp lame (at least scrawny mcnoarms can act like a brute without problems). I find the joy in bardic characters to be getting to flex ky oration muscles, and I don't like sitting there waiting for another player to struggle through a simple conversation while I can think of at least semi-witty and relevant discourse. It's un-immersive and frustrating, it's that simple.

>2016
>WBL

Come one, 5e should be a default assumption by now.

>It's another "The player's charisma score is ten times more important than the character's" episode

Maybe you could help a shy friend rather than judge a "bad player". I assume you don't do that anyway. You also structure your posts a lot like OP.

You certainly ain't no wizard.

5e has no WBL?

And no, "newer is best" is never default. See 4e.

5e doesn't give treasure in greater amounts relative to difficulty of encounter?

It does, but it's built in a way that it largely doesn't take the PCs having magic items into account, so by default there isn't some outrageous sum of money you use to buy magic items. I think there is some sort of "Starting wealth for higher level characters" chart in the DM's guide, but it's nowhere near the same as what 3.5 was doing and it's more optional than old WBL

So how often do you roll INT then tell the GM to give you the most optimal course of action?

No idea where you get that notion, nor that bards and diplomancers are the same beast.

Basically this.

I don't need them to act out everything the character says, I just ask enough to at least get what your character is trying to accomplish. Then based on the role, and assuming the character is saying it more suave than the player, I judge if it was good or not.

Only now do I see the irony that the most minmaxy 5e classes are all charisma based

>It doesn't have WBL
>OK, it DOES have it, but it's smaller, so it's definately not factored in...
I know you won't do this, but compare the treasure you'd get from killing enough monsters to reach lv2 in 5e to the "Not WBL table that lists richness according to rank" figure at lv2.
I'm almost certain the two will be very close.

So apparently using paragraph breaks makes me the OP? Alright then.

I'm all for occasionally suggesting ways to handle a situation, but that can't always be done well especially when you're trying to stay in character as a low charisma character. I don't often dump charisma but in a lot of cases it's just not practical to keep it at a relevant level.

You also don't seem to understand how constantly telling someone how to play their character would be lacking any semblance of tact. Like I said, the kind of person I'm referring to lacks the ability to think of ways to use their skills, and once you suggest a way to do so they often don't know how to follow through. I don't want to impose on someone else by informing a player how to roleplay, and I'm sure it wouldn't be particularly appreciated after the first few incidents.

Not to mention I have my own things to take care of and I didn't sign up to roleplay the other person's character along with my own. If I am going to be the one taking the reigns in all of the social situations I may as well have just rolled the party face in the first place. Then I wouldn't be stepping on any toes and everyone would most likely be fulfilling their role in the party to the fullest.

Never said best, just said "default".

And yes, what said.

>The most diplomatically inclined players are a stoic and a guy whose attempts are constantly being ruined by the member of the party who always starts shit.

>Smug image
>Semantics

Bait better, not harder.

>That guy always young, pretty elven/asian woman. With magic/setting specific special-snowflake powers.
>Prioritizes pretty over every other concern.
>Despite knowing the types of game we play, always useless in combat, expects everyone else to do the fighting, has to be cajoled to soak up some damage. I assume this is some bullshit defense mechanism.
>No respect or empathy for NPCs who aren't sucking his character's imaginary cock, cold-blooded murder is an option for minor social infractions.
>Jumps on every NPC interaction, even those that are directed to other PCs. Shoehorns himself in, without concern for other players, or their own intentions. Demands to be the center of attention, but once there often has no idea what to do.
>Bad things happening to his character are taken personally, when bad things happening is the basis of play.
>Frequently has to be talked down from game derailing bullshit, such as killing all the townguard because they had the temerity to question his character's presence at a crimescene, rather than go quietly, he escalated to combat assuming the other PCs would go to war with the guard and cover his escape.
>Craven approach to play, won't act at all unless from a position of power, if he can't roll his highest trait, assumes the GM has it out for him.

Interesting that by "help a shy friend" you could only understand that in gaming table terms.

Being mad about group size and introduction of inexperienced players is 100% justified, talk with your dm dude

>she
found your problem

We're talking about party faces in roleplaying games. Hence the reason I referred to game terms, because we're talking about games and the player's effect on them. Going out as a wingman to try and get my friend laid has nothing to do with his ability or lackthereof of playing a bard. If you don't have anything to say that actually relates to the topic at hand and would rather continue trying to deflect my points, I suppose I'll leave you be.

Okay, bitch nigger, you start summoning demons next time you wanna be a wizard - or are you just a rollplayer?

>Implying being a bro to your friend isn't important when discussing games played with friends
And you say I'm deflecting?
Maybe you need to check your priorities.
Protip, friends > games

Had an extremely smart guy play a barbarian once, dump INT.
He got called out on being out of character but was a good sport about it.
Ended up we'd have him roll to see if he actually had a good idea or not.

Not wanting my friend to sit on his thumbs the entire time because he can't actually play his character isn't a bad thing, but since you obviously know you can't come up with a decent explanation as to why you disagree with my points and would rather continue to try and fail to insult me, I'm done wasting my time.

If anyone else who disagrees with my opinion would like to explain their reasoning I'm all ears.

For quick reference an uncommon item is like a bag of holding or a +1 weapon, a rare is like a +1 armor or +2 weapon, and a very rare is a +2 armor or +3 weapon.

I think you're the aspie. Why do you play this game? I want you to consider real hard just why you play the game in the first place. Maybe MOBAs are better for you.

>Standard Campaign
>lvl 5-10
>no magical weapon
oh, wow, that sounds rough

Deflecting again.

Tell me, yes or no, do you ever spend time with him outside the game?

Have you ever talked to him, supportively, about these "issues", yes or no?

Is he even your friend, yes or no?

You can weasel your way out of this all you like, but if you answered "no" to any of those, you have bigger problems. What we do is an inherently social activity, so how your group socialises fucking matters.

One thing that I have seen a few groups do is have a Brains Trust for high Int characters. So, essentially the group can help the character OOC and it's assumed to be just that character being that smart. Something similar could be done for a face trust.

Shit, this But also, color me curious...

There's also not really a whole lot of things to buy with the money you get in the first place. That amount is really only good for things like horses or pooling some money for one of the characters to have plate

>Interrupting the DM
>Gratuitously forcing memes at every opportunity
>People who whine for a "redo" whether it's because they rolled low or didn't think the consequences of their actions through, especially when the DM warns them ahead of time

Whenever my friends do this they absolutely piss me off. The DM is describing the town we just arrived in, you could have waited two minutes for us to get a feel for the elven city before you just say "I go find the nearest inn and go to bed. The quest giver is expecting us tomorrow and my character is probably tired." Way to kill any chance of something fun happening on the side, ruin the DM's pacing as well as our knowledge of the city and treat the game like an MMO all in one fell swoop.

Yes, okay, you named your ape animal companion Harambe. What a "cool and unique" name. You don't have to bring it up in unrelated conversations with NPCs by mentioning you have "Our Lord and Savior Harambe the Saint" standing outside, praising him every time something good happens, or trying to convince the DM your ape can become a deity. It's really getting old.

Yes you rolled a one and were spotted setting that building on fire. Yes the guards managed to track you down. No the captain of the guard won't accept your fifty gold bribery to get him to look the other way after you inadvertently set a large portion of the city's residential district on fire because someone overcharged you at the store. Why would you go through with all of this after the DM told you it was a bad idea expect a redo?

God my friends are fucking retarded when it comes to TTRPGs.

Sounds normal.
I don't mean to shit on the idea, it's good. I just assumed players interacting like this ooc was standard and didn't need formal rules...

What is it user, enlighten us?

Gay Incestuous Seagull bros fuck.

If it's any consolation I also hate that you recognize that

Based on how he treats socialising, I think you have him pegged.

I deserve that, but it was a car crash, I couldn't stop reading.

>guy plays a Barbarian "too stupid to know he's Evil"
>the barbarian's motivation in life is "shinies", which is what he calls goldpieces
>quite readily uses physical coercion to get his way from NPC's and PC's alike
>refers to himself in the third person
>sometimes says surprisingly intelligent things
>immediately covers up by making grunting noises and repeating his own name a few times.

It was entertaining. I think there's a certain leeway where players intelligence versus character intelligence is concerned. As long as someone just plays his character.

I hate that from now on we will also be able to recognize it. Not the whole thing, just this one specific image, but that's bad enough already.

Consider the following.

Beak blowjobs.

I did talk with them they said "if you don't like the way I'm running my campaign you don't have to play." I hate to be sentimental and shit but I've had this character for over a year now consistently. I caught feels.

...

The best way to handle this in my opinion is to try to make the other players feel smart. Never come up with the plan itself but ask leading questions and make "if only we could..." and "can't we just..." comments.

If you play your cards right the high int characters won't notice it at all.