The group's face can't string a sentence together

what works for me is telling them to come up with reasons why the person should go with what they're asking, for starters
help them learn, don't be mad because they aren't all smooth-talkers at your table
(also, giving penalties and bonuses if they come up with good stuff, which you are supposed to do, by the damn rules, goes a long way to getting a powergaming but quiet player to string some words together)

He's being deliberately obtuse.

Or he's retarded.

But OP wants players to act out their rolls, and when they say really dumb shit for it to effect the world around them.
I increase or lower DCs based on the difficulty of the action, and that doesn't exclude social skills.
When a player attempts to take a captured bandit with brain damage and sell him as a slave to some random trader, that is going to be a hell of a lot harder than if he was handing him into the guard and demanding a reward.
And the way he asks for a reward and talks with the guard effects things just the same.

>tfw you find out that Veeky Forums is full of stuttering spergs who make max charisma bards and roll instead of talking because they are too autistic to do anything else.

Don't move the goalposts faggot.

initially brought up the whole "I roll X" method of gameplay.

What they are reaming OP about is the idea of getting pissed off at a socially inept person trying to play someone charismatic in a game.

Yeah its probably some projection and persecution issues, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

Whats so wrong with wanting to pretend for a while that you arent a mouthbreathing faggot. Thats litterally what this whole hobby was created for.

Shut up asperger.

That was my first post in this thread, how did I move the goal posts?

Did you expect anything else? thats all most of Veeky Forums is.

The hobby was created to roleplay and rolling dice without actually making the attempt is the antithesis of that.

I spend so much of my time here pretending to be retarded that sometimes I forgot we aren't all pretending.

>playing thr only cha based class/character
>not socially retarded as a person
>my character is super anxious about everything, so when nervous says dumb things, making him a shitty party face

It's good times.

>Current character has minimum INT/WIS at 1 and max Charisma Strength at 18.
>DM is obsessed with rolling for everything and does so openly.
>That moment when you tell the big bad to kill himself, and get a nat 20 +9 because of Charisma + 13 because of potions/items and +15 because bards/wizards and +3 because you're a well dressed idiot.
>Success roll of 50, needed 20
>His face when his BBEG kills himself because an inbred barbarian sister fucker with the Charisma of a god tells him too and starts a personality cult.

Your homebrew is shit, Frank.

It's the same on any board. /pol/ is full of brown people who like anime. Veeky Forums has a legion of busriders and people driving hand-me-down automatic civics or corollas. /k/ has many underageb& noguns. Why would Veeky Forums, the board for Autism: The Hobby, be any different? Of course it's filled with spergs who can't roleplay.

>bwahaha! Now I, baron Von evildude, shall activate my brassica-o-nator, transforming this helpless town into cabbages!

>kill urself

>ok sir

What is wrong with your gm?

This is why I have done away with charisma as a stat and split its skills onto Wis and Int.
I make my players role play it and I gotta say that our "I roll to seduce" guy is a real life bard because he's got lines without end.

>The paladin player is bummed out that he can't make a coherent sentence and has been actually putting in effort to improve him self.

>The monk player and the sorcerer player are now happy that Wis based classes aren't shit for multiclassing any more. (Monk player is Sun soul/Vengance paladin, Sorcerer player is a Dragon Sorcerer/moon druid)

too many bioware games probably

If they're shit at describing sword swings, do you increase the difficulty of attack rolls?

No?

Then you are That GM. Of course, if you do you're still That GM. It's tedious houseruling for no benefit.

Yes, describe the action.

But if you pass the roll, then you pass the roll. Intent and goal of the character is what matters, not the details of the description.

a while ago.. but I guess still relevant
>playing Marvel heroic roleplaying game
>player rolls up a character that has a spiritbond with a spider
>Cool.mp3
>The team captures a couple of AIM minions
>Spider-dude "I want to go good cop/bad cop on them to learn who they work for!"
>alrightythatmightwork.webm
>the spider soothes the minions by lightly touching them
>the player asks "So who do you work for?"
This continues for 10 minutes with the two of them being good spider-cop and.. random person who just asks who they are working for. No violence, no threats, no crazy acting or anything
>Finally give up and just give the players what they want
>"Durrr we work for AIM. You can find them at bla bla bla"
>Spider dude: "Aaah so it's BANE!"
>wat
>since this is one of the more experienced players, the rest of the team sorta looks at him as the leader
>Well it looks like we are looking for the luchador Bane in a marvel setting
>"Are you sure that you want to look for.. Bane?"
>Well duh GM-user. It's what the minions said

>sperg theatrefag constantly backseat negotiating
>complains about other players not roleplaying well enough yet tries to act as tactician with his borderline retarded barbarian
>uses an almost impenetrable ye olde english lexicon and constantly complains that nobody else does voices

Bane?

>tfw 99% of those talking shit are juat as spergy but lack self awareness

>tfw we are all spergs sperging out on spergs

fug

this is the kind of thing that I would insist on having them roleplay. If you are going to talk your way through a boss encounter, you have to make it make sense in character and have athe least a general idea of what you are saying to the guy.

I'm going to try to convince him to kill himself + high roll just doesn't cut it. The silver tongue devil routine has been done to death but can still make for a memorable story encounter if effort is put into it and it doesn't become every fight.

I also don't get why people play rpg's like they are fucking Diablo dice rolling simulator 2017. I understand when you are first trying it out but like, give shit a try you don't have to be fucking Dickens level storyteller or able to act like DeNiro. Just be vaguely descriptive.

there are plenty of other types of problem players and problem gms but I will end my vent here.

"i roll to attack with my sword"

Oh boy fucking fantastic, you're really living out your fantasies of not being a mouth-breathing sperg now!

FFS let your players enjoy themselves and customize the game to make them better. High charisma characters are good at manipulation, maybe give tips on how the player can get people to listen to him, and offer different bonuses for using different social mechanics.

Subtle NPCs like courtiers can see through deception more easily, blunt and tough guys will generally not be intimidated, clever merchants can poke holes in your persuasion attempts. Now players have a reason to consider which proverbial weapon they will use in social combat instead of just persuading everyone.

>i'm a low cha, typical "i've seen some shit" ex-merc fighter
>present the main points of discussion when talking to npcs, guide discussion for my buddies to develop
>warlock spec'd into social skills embelishes and asks the questions, ends up doing the checks

best of both worlds, fuck yeah

Sometimes I like to pretend I am a young female paladin who is curious about thick monster dicks and I shave my whole body and put bananas in my bum.

It's sounds to me like your player just wanted to reenact the plane scene.

Honestly got all his understanding of story and shit from edgy anime. Was expecting us to play weird animeme characters that would solve our problems with weird convoluted magic and schemes. When he saw my sheets he assumed I was going for some kind of dragon ball Z bullshit or something...

...and not a literal sisterfucking retard with the strength and charisma of five pounds of pure Columbia white wearing a dress made of as much silk as he could buy so that when he went back to his village they would think he was the most powerful man ever for being so resplendently clothed and not realize it was literally just a huge red and gold wedding dress mixed with platemail.

Finally - someone honest in this thread.

I did roleplay it. All of the players roleplayed. We're a group that very regularly plays together and we love RP heavy games. DM was just a shit. He'd literally ask for cliff notes and zone out while we were trying to play the game. Like, the final encounter I tried to do hambarianretard speech about the wrath of the mountain godkings of old - lore DM explicitly told me to weave in, and got told to "just roll."

Thankfully wizardfriend is now building his own campaign and we've all got prior experience with him to know he's good at it.

>the group's DPS is a pussy who can barely tell which end to hold his sword by
>probably hasn't killed anything bigger than a rat in his whole life
>insists he's the DPS due to his high physical stats
>have to sit there looking at his arm-fat flapping around as he apes his idea of a spear thrust

>mfw i've killed multiple dragons in real life but the GM won't allow me to play my Dragonslayer homebrew class
>insists that I play a Ranger specialized in dragon killing when I don't know anything about wilderness survival

>Killing dragons

fucking Drakophobe shitlord its 2016 just let the dragons kidnap white princess already

So you're are one of those faggots who go to dragon safaris and have the dragon tracked for them, given a Dragon gun and then the dragon hide and then they pretend they hunted it themselves?

>I can't think of a serious justification for my dracophobia
>better invent an excuse based on discredited thousand-year-old myths!

The Hobby was created because Gygax wanted to make one of his Table Top Wargames skirmish scale, and everything expanded out from there.

>the group's wizard can't cast any spells
>insists he's the wizard because of high mental stats
>have to sit there watching him try to conjure a fireball so his character can use the spell on a group of kobolds

I bet you don't let anybody play a fighter unless they actually know how to use a sword either, you cock goblin.

>the groups face is now their DM
>they just sit and be overly caution and not inquisitive enough

No, they tell me what they want to do and I describe how they did it. The game engine is in my head, it's my job to make sure it stays consistent.

Sounds like your party just needs to get good.

>Not being able to cast fireball
>2016

Honestly, why the fuck are you playing rpgs with other people if you can't handle a person's minor flaw?
I honestly feel that guy's pain. I much enjoy playing charasmatic talky characters but I'm shit at the actual talking part. Like I know what I'm going to say and I feel completely relaxed and everything but when I open my mouth I just stutter and say "uhh" all the time like I'm an awkward piece of shit. I have no idea how I'm supposed to fix this and get better at speaking like I feel I should. It's like satan is controlling my tongue as I speak.

Take a public speaking class and lose your virginity. Should fix all your issues.

Is this what sex looks like? If so I don't want none.

>Not wanting that tongue deep on your ass while she gives you an aggressive handjob

Girl could stuff her tongue so far into your face that you choke on it and die.

!HOT!

You can describe your social rolls too without actually living them.
>"I use my silver tongue to persuade them to my side"
Should be just as valid as anything else, even if the player doesn't actually know what to say that would persuade them.

>not wanting a bifucated tongue playing with your genitals
Git gud.

I spent a year and a half playing a face character in a game with a GM who hated social rolls. Every time I'd try to roll to bluff someone, "the lie is unbelievable, so it's at a -20."

>Player always plays faces and party leaders
>Makes socially inept alchemist
>Still ends up acting party face.

Has more to do with the other players then with him. It was so funny to see the cleric and paladin turn to the sketched out drug addicted plague doctor and be like 'well, arent you going to smooth talk our way into the churches good graces?'

>DC 20 to talk someone into suicide.
That alone is mind boggling.

>X happens
>"That's impossible, NPC told us X wouldn't happen!"
THAT'S BECASUE HE LIED TO YOU.

Oh, come off it.

You guys are being so defensive, because you all know it's different. Social skills, for want of a better word, require you to actually say something. No-one can perform a physical action in a game, but unless you want a really basic simulated victory:

> "I roll persuasion. Does he let me pass?"
> "You bullshit the guard, and he lets you pass."

...you're going to have to put some effort into it. And yes, the gaming community can be plagued by people who literally have no social skills whatsoever, and that's why the disconnect leads to a unique area of dysfunction.

It's like, I don't care if your character has 18 Charisma, man. You're not going to be romancing that NPC, because god, I can't fucking stand you. I can't imagine a woman letting you crawl on top of her without screaming rape. So let's leave the weird stuff at the door, and just have you talk your way past dumb guards or something, all right? And next time, don't make a social character because I don't want to have to deal with that shit.

Also, social ain't some magic bullet the way physical skills and magic are literally magic bullets. You only get out what you put in. No, you're not going to convince the King to loan you his army if you stammer out "There's gold in dem hills."

Fucking work for it, you entitled shits. I'm not your enabler.

>I don't care if your character has 18 Charisma, man.

And that's why you're That GM.

The player invested points/xp/whatever into being good at something, just like a warrior or mage. It's no different. At all.

But you arbitrarily decide that they can't be good at it despite making the same investment every other archetype has?

Dick move. Flat-out.

At least remove all social skills, stats, merits, flaws, and abilities from your game beforehand, so everyone knows where you stand and your players know not to join your game in the first place.

Go play out your power fantasy elsewhere. You don't get to godmod NPCs. Go back to your casualized third edition with rules for everything so you don't have to think.

>Our 18 CHA Paladin is played by a sperg
>The Bard and I, a Monk, have to be joint party face.

Bard is a great roleplayer though so it's fine.

>the korean guy whose entire backstory for his character is "I'm a warmage and I died in the battle."

Who said anything about godmoding?

Some things are just impossible.

You can't end the world with a single spell as a magic-user.

You can't destroy a castle with a single swing of a sword as a warrior.

You can't talk a king into giving you his crown with a single speech as party face.

You seem to be missing the core argument here.

"They are all the same; treat them as such."

If they can explain their goal and how they want to accomplish it and it isn't impossible, let them roll. No matter what the action is.

It's GMing 101. If there's an element of risk (that is, not so simple as to be impossible to fail and not so hard as to be impossible to succeed, and there's consequences for success and/or failure) then roll. Otherwise don't.

>Best roleplayer in the party is a mute
>A fucking mute
>I don't mean we're bad, he's just damn good at playing a fucking MUTE who is really expressive
>We're out-RPed by a literal mute.
>This fucking mute RPed a STAREDOWN against the captain of an invading army and made him TURN AROUND AND FUCK OFF
>The mute ended a CR7 battle by GLARING at it
I have to get good.

But that totally eliminates the entire point of roleplaying.

Fucking this. You don't just "roll to x, roll to y." You explain what you attempt to do and then roll to see how successful it is, and then the GM bases what happens on the result.

Compare:

>"With my Halberd, I'm going to try and stab the Orc through the chest as it's winding up to attack Bob again."
>"Alright, roll!"
>"17."
>"You hit. Roll for damage."
>"Eight"
>"You run him through the chest with it, leaving a bloody wound but he's still clinging to life."
>"Right. I have Multiattack, so I'm gonna try and pull the halberd free from his chest and bring it down on his head."
>"Roll."
>"...Nat one."
>"As you try to pull the halberd back, the Orc grabs it by the shalt as he screams a warcry at you through bloodied teeth. He pulls the halberd out of your grasp and drops it. You're now disarmed."

To:

>"I attack the orc. 17."
>"Hit."
>"Eight damage."
>"He's still alive."
>"I attack again....crit fail."
>"You drop your weapon."

Social occasions should be similar. Players should at least have a vague idea of what they're going to say and how they're going to say it. They don't need to act out every word if they're not comfortable, but something like:

>The guard stops you and asks what you're doing out this late. "It's past curfew, sir," he says with a frown.
>I show him that botany book we found earlier. "Pray forgive me, good man! I'm searching for the Latinnameus Plantius, a rare moss that only grows at night!"
>Alright, roll for persuasion.

How so?

You're stating something as fact without any supporting points.

The roleplaying happens with the "explain their goal and how they want to accomplish it" as well as all the things that don't require rolls.

If the player isn't good at explaining the how and why, don't penalize them. Assume their 18 CHA character knows their job well enough to convey it well instead.

If the how and why is fucking stupid (trying to get more gold from a job by threatening the king in his own court) it's probably impossible and give them realistic consequences.

Is it playing to racist tropes if a black dragon kidnaps a white princess?

Character interaction is the core of roleplaying. If you remove that, why are you "roleplaying"?

How is that removing character interaction?

I'm not sure you're reading the posts.

Rule #1:

You don't roleplay, you don't role. Period. No exceptions. Ever.

>strawman

Do you give them a chance to role play it if they want?

There's a scene in Thunderbolt Fantasy where the protagonist and a master assassin are drinking together. The assassin Sha Wu Sheng is looking for an opening in Shang Bu Huan's defense but no matter how he plans to act, he can see how Huan would immediately counter him.

The drinking is revealed to be a very subtle battle between the two where Huan is constantly on guard and Sheng is trying to find an opening. I can imaging the guy's character getting involved in something like that.

Just ignore him, he's a threeaboo who would start throwing dice at a player because he RPed something to where the roll was handwaved before curling up in the fetal position and shitting his pants.

I don't even play DnD of any kind, dude.

I even explicitly outlined situations where you do not roll dice.

But social skills and stats are the same as all other skills and stats and should be rolled the same way, whatever that "way" is for your particular table.

>Have shitty face OP described
>Multiclass and usurp his role
>He can't speak up about it because of aformentioned reasons

OK, so you set guards upon the party because they were set up for a crime.
The bard says "I roll diplomacy/persuasion" and after mods it's well in the 40s, so he passes your DC
Do you then ask him to explain what he says? Do you change the DC if he says dumb shit? Is it fair to penalize a CHA roll when the action is idiotic?

Never understood why people use shit like this as an insult. not cause it's offensive or anything, but you are literally excusing peoples actions by , in essence, going "Don't worry they're X".

Surely it's more insulting to imply that someone is inexcusably stupid, not give them a defence

>you find out that Veeky Forums is full of stuttering spergs
You don't fucking say

Read the thread. I answered all this shit already.

I'm not repeating myself because you're a lazy bastard.

Not him, but as far as I can tell there are two actually worthwhile schools of thought on the subject.

1) Say what you roll. Have a player who prefers to do this. Natural one on his persuasion check?
>I go up to the guardswoman and say "Excuse me sir, could you possibly let us inside?"

2) Mods for arguments. If you have a good excuse for what you were doing on your bluff check, or give the guardswoman a flash of your abs through your open-fronted shirt, then you get a bonus for your check.

Both are equally valid.

I'm autistic, and excusing a spastic's actions is something I don't stand for.

I probably take more responsibility for my actions than most adults and believe me I make a lot of fuckups.

It's roleplaying, not rollplaying. If you're unable to roleplay a charismatic man with social skills, don't do it. Acting is as important if not more than the dice results. A weakass can act as a warrior and a normal guy as a wizard with some imagination, but you cannot act as a socially talented person unless you got some social skills yourself. You don't need to be Confidence McSilvertongue, just not be a total sperg.

but but but muh shell

>groups warrior can't actually cleave a man in half
>insists hes the warrior because of his character sheet
>have to sit there watching him roll a dice instead of actually cleaving the DM in half

Well, was the lie believable?

>you may not know something specific about the setting personally, but if you roll a knowledge skill your character might know it
>you may not be fit enough to lift half a ton, but if you roll an athletics skill check your character might be able to lift it
>you may not be a charismatic person, so fuck you if you're trying to play a charismatic character

In the last one-shot I DMed the only socially skilled player (or better said, socially active) decided to play an insufferable dyke who hated everyone. She literally had a flaw on her sheet that made people hate her and she didn't work on changing their minds. But since the player is talkative and the other two are not, she was still the party's face.

The town they were supposed to help ended up revolting against them and besieging the abandoned house where they were staying.

10/10, top fun.

It's a game, not a theater.

It's about the character's abilities, not the player's.

You're just arbitrarily punishing the social characters, which is already a fairly unrewarding archetype as they're the only ones that are generally useless in a fight in anything that isn't DnD.

If the character is good and the player is not, then the character needs to be able to succeed where the player does not. The only way to do this is to treat social skills and stats the same as any other roll.

It's the same the other way around. If the player is good and the character is not, the character needs to fail where the player would succeed. Dice rolls allow this.

You literally can't roleplay if the characters skills and the players skills are arbitrarily the same regardless of stats, which is what you are proposing.

>critical failures

What's wrong with critical failures? As long as you include a confirmation roll, they're not that bad.

>It's a game, not a theater.
A game of pretendig to be someone else. So basically theater without the audience.