Character is supposed to be the big strong guy

>Character supposed to be smooth talker guy
>Try to smooth talk
>sorry, dice say no
>cannot do smooth talker thing despite being smooth talker

did i get fucking tricked?

In all honesty, it's the nature of the game.

but user, if OP did that then he'd have nothing to back pedal into!

Your GM calls for skill checks too often, then, simple as that. Even the Rules Cyclopedia warned you not to do that.

Basically what I was hoping to say here but without turning it into a martials vs casters or 3.5 bitching thread.

Well...look at it this way: NOTHING is stronger than him!

Think of it as "You weren't able to do it this time", not "You're not strong enough"

Basically this, pointless Rollin on your DM's part.

I'd probably let you pass most strong man stuff as long as it isn't pushing your physical limits or you aren't being hindered by an imposing force.

No, your just another may may shit poster making the same "lol I hate d&d" thread over and over again. Faggot

>without turning it into a martials vs casters or 3.5 bitching thread
It already was one before you posted.

>did i get fucking tricked?
It depends. There are many situations where as a DM I wouldn't consult the dice for things, but simply go with the appropriate result.

>strength 19
>shabby wooden door
You dislocate your shoulder, scream like a girl and lose confidence in your strength for the next 2 weeks (-3 on all rolls). Also, the wizard has lost her last respect for you.

Actualpy I agree with the OP. There's some situations where you shouldn't roll the dice at all. You either can lift 200 pounds or not, no ifs and buts about it. Alternatively, if the GM hasn't got a clear idea in his mind how much an item weights or how strong a door is and rolls the dice to see if it was in the character's range, then any weaker character should automatically fail without rolling for it if the stronger character fails to lift or break it. It's just basic logic.

Maybe you're a small guy afterall

>then any weaker character should automatically fail
Nah, not quite.
While I think you are mostly right I don't think you should see it quite that binary. There are also things like technique and how well you slept and ate etc.
Where you draw the line is your business, but if a str 18 elf girl fails at it, I'll still permit a str 17 halfling to try his luck. If the str 9 barbarian can do it, the aforementioned str 18 elf girl won't have to consult the dice.

>>thread is supposed to have greentext story
>>try to read story
>>sorry, greentext is vague bait thread
>>read through thread despite knowing OP is a faggot
>did i get fucking tricked?

Stop playing d&d with its swingy-ass rolls.
>You are the strongest human that has ever lived
>There is a 1 in 4 chance that you can't break open this "Easy" wooden chest

>even the most nimble-fingered thief has only a 25% chance to open it
>there is a 100% chance the wizard can open it with some shitty cantrip
And that's why I never played anything other than a wizard. Sure is nice being the only character capable of doing their job with any degree of consistency.

The strongest guys in the world routinely fail weightlifting attempts. If they succeed, they try to lift a little more next time.

>You either can lift 200 pounds or not, no ifs and buts about it.
Sure... in an ideal situation. But "ideal situation" rarely describes things when you're adventuring. Maybe your hands are wet or the surface is otherwise slippery. Maybe you can't get a good grip because of the shape. Maybe you don't have a good footing, so you slip. Maybe you're tired or distracted. Maybe the wound you recently took didn't quite heal as well as it should have, despite the healing potion you drank afterwards. There are plenty of reasons why you might fail to lift something, even though you could easily lift something of equal weight at gym when you're reasonably well rested and don't have any unusual circumstances to worry about.

That's why the rules for "take 10" and "take 20"(and their equivalents in other systems) exist.

To be fair, OP wouldn't know that.

Congrats, you are now Worf.
Have fun being Worf.

I always play Worf too.

Obviously your character just has a bad back.

Probably from all the lifting he did.

>be big strong guy
>roll poorly, fail to do big strong guy thing
>7-strength wizard decides to give it a try
>the dice are with him and it works

If there's no chance of failure why bother using dice at all?

Just freeform roleplay your big strong character who succeeds at everything ever. It might get a bit boring though.

>be masturbater
>doesn't improve the quality of my bait

>d&d fags so brainwashed that they think a non-swingy system would have to be freeform
Holy shit.

You have a shitty DM.
DMs are supposed to weigh the situations and measure all variables before determining the outcome.

>people who like what I don't like are brainwashed

Well 200 pounds should be easily liftable by anyone who isn't an actual girl (assuming we're talking deadlifts, actually doing a clean and jerk of 200 pounds isn't much harder for an adult male, but takes a while to get used to the proper technique), but take it up to olympic lift levels.
Competition lifts are almost never as high as training weights, because many factors affect maximum capacity, and one cannot control those factors well enough to take the risk at a competitive stage. When you're pushed to your limits, especially when you've got asstons of adrenaline pumping through you, lifting a weight is NOT binary and you'd have to be a DYEL manlet skelly fagtron to think so

He would have gone pro of it wasn't for that bum knee.

That's why as a rule, I explain failed rolls not as your character being bad at their job, but as bad luck or adverse circumstances.

In other words, the dice didn't decide that you're not a smooth enough talker, they decided that you were unlucky and met the ONE GUARD who reacted to your claim to being the Ambassador of Driesland by saying "Sir, I've met the Ambassador. He's a good friend of mine."

Or whatever other excuse you can make to make it not the character's fault, but adverse circumstances. You fail the climb check not because you somehow forgot how climbing works, but because whatever you tied the rope to got pulled out.

6/10
4 for the overall bait. Low quality, not enough detail to really cause rage.
+2 for keeping the problem vague enough that this could be misinterpreted as either a Martials in 3.5 suck argument, or thay the fault lies with the d20 system as a whole.

Would not respond seriously.

It is some serious brainwashing if you think any non-swingy system is freeform, yes.
Thank you for agreeing with me by not contesting this point.

My DM does this too, and it does a lot to take the sting out of rolling like shit.

all my players know the take ten and twenty rules

as a dm, its bad form to allow this. if the big guy cant do it, the little guy cant either. he can roll to assist at most, but can only add his modifier to the the big guys roll.

Strawman.

I said a system without a chance for failure not a "non-swingy" system.

Nah, fuck off. Sometimes people can do shit they wouldn't normally, and sometimes people who can do shit normally fuck it up.

I think you're overestimating most people m8, the average male is weak as shit, I'd lower that down to like 150 pound deadlifts at most.

i dont believe that in standard rolling situations (ignoring outside situations like fighting or escaping where "adrenaline" could be a factor) that someone who weighs 100 pounds dripping wet can lift a stone boulder by themselves as easily as someone akin to a professional athlete.
>Another example; I would never be as good at sucking dick as you present yourself to be. I wouldn't even try and would instead leave it to you.

I disagree. I'm a pretty skinny guy and even I can deadlift 200lbs.

We're talking about just picking it up off the ground here not hoisting over your shoulders.

That's fine, it just shows how big of an idiot you are.

But please, throw in a few more pointless insults, I'm sure that'll talk someone around to your point.

Picking up 200 lbs for a few moments with a lot of strain is different than being able to actually lift it with good form for a decent amount of time
He is making a perfectly good argument on top of the insults, though.

You're not supposed to even roll if it is strictly impossible for a character to do something. If the level 3 fighter wants to roll to see if he can leap into across the ocean you just tell him "no". Rolls are for things on which the result is on question. The skinny 7 str wizard would accomplish nothing by trying to lift, say, a 750lb boulder. Absolutely nothing. He probably could hardly het it to budge unless it was the right shape. If someone else picked it up and gave it to the wizard, the sheer weight would fuck his spine and rupture a few tendons on the way.

Also: While people are able to use far more strength than they would usually be able to on a pinch, this usually ends with horrific muscle damage when taken to extremes, and most the tales of mothers lifting cars to save their children and such are purely anecdotal or have other variables which are omitted in favor of a good story.

Failing a roll doesn't necessarily mean it's impossible for a character to do something. It normally means they just failed, for any number of other reasons. That's why rerolling certain actions is a thing. Maybe the athlete just plain botches his form, was in a rush, their grip was slipping, etc, so they failed. Maybe the non-athlete happened to get a solid grip, or somehow lucked into the right form for lifting a heavy load, so they managed to get it to bulge, if not move it altogether if they passed the threshold for moving it.

That's like saying if my parties warlock failed a persuasion roll, and I try it with different wording/approach (while having only a minor difference in Charisma), he says "Nah, if the most charismatic person in the party couldn't convince the NPC, you won't be able to either," even though I passed the rolls well. Or better, if the Warrior with her strength and proficiency couldn't move a large boulder, by with just my +5 in strength I do pass, the DM goes "Nah, she better at strength things then you, so if she couldn't, you obviously can't," even though again, I passed the roll well.

Btw, she's like, 80-100 lb and 4-6" smaller then my character, and not some muscle women, while he's got a body not unlike a heavyweight boxer from daily physical labor and training before his adventuring. How exactly would he not be able to move that bolder, but she would?

>tldr: restricting what a character can do based on their stats, because someone else has better stats, even though both can pass the roll, but the one with better stats failed, is bad, and only a bad DM would do this.

Don't listen to these faggots
If the strongest guy in the party can't lift the boulder than nobody else in the party should be able to lift the boulder either, barring exceptions such as spells or machinery.

Not only does it tank the morale of the big guy who wanted to be the strong man of the party but it also leads to stupid situations where the luck of the player supersedes the skill of the character.

>"Oh, you got an 18 STR and 16 CON? Well fuck you, the dice hate you and you drop it on your foot, take 1d10 damage!
>"Oh, you want to try your luck Mr. Twink? Oh damn, you not only lifted the boulder but a team of supermodel elves come out of the brush and take turns sucking your dick, doesn't matter that you only have 8 STR, you're the strongest fella in the party!"

If you can't handle being forced to deal with your weaknesses then you're obviously more of a rollplayer than the guy who wants to succeed at doing the job he was built around doing.

So you made a strawman, then?
Because Op was upset about the swinginess overriding stats.

It'd certainly be a step up from having every action being just as likely to fail horribly than they are to succeed spectacularly.

"Oh, you're playing a Barbarian with max STR attempting to pick up a 50 lb. rock and toss it? Well that's going to take penalties because of improvised weapon, and you're going to have to roll even though you're more than capable of launching the rock with one hand."

"Oh, you only got a 9? Well you only throw the rock a meter in front of you and everyone laughs at what a limp wristed faggot you are!"

"Oh, you're going to cast telekinesis? Okay cool, you launch the 200 lb. slab of marble into the enemy and because they failed their reflex roll, you manage to squash them like a bug, good for you."

>"Oh, you're playing a Barbarian with max STR attempting to pick up a 50 lb. rock and toss it? Well that's going to take penalties because of improvised weapon, and you're going to have to roll even though you're more than capable of launching the rock with one hand."

Yeah, in that situation there should be no check to pick up the rock. The penalties represent the fact that you probably won't hit the target, not that you wouldn't be able to throw it at all.

Usually, you only ever roll for things you have a chance of failing.

So if you're rolling a die, there's a chance you're not strong enough to do the thing you want to do.

If it's something like a critfail, you pull a muscle.

Nice homerules.
I agree, it is generally better to avoid using the extremely swingy roll system when possible.

If only there were some way to use dice to get an even curve. In some kind of... Bell shape.

Yeah, in a perfect world sure.

But I've played in a campaign where my Eidolon, who was rocking something like an 18 STR, had to roll a STR check to pick up my character, a 100 lb. summoner who wasn't struggling or impeding his eidolon's ability to pick him up.

The general rule of thumb I employ when playing deeandee is that I try to roll as rarely as humanly possible, which works out beautifully since mages will rarely have to touch their dice beyond rolling for damage and will most likely get more bang for their buck compared to their martial counterparts.

Shadowrun is really bad at this. I remember the 4e rules for strength a 6 ST char cant lift more than like 200 lbs.

Fun fact: There's nothing in the rules saying that you have to roll a strength check whenever you pick something up.

Most games I've encountered handle physical feats as thus:

You have a base amount you can lift/sprint/jump that you do not even need to roll for. This is based on your relevant stats.

If you want to surpass this base amount, you can roll. The results of the roll determine how far beyond your base you can manage. This usually will not take you below your base, with the possible exception of a crit fail. Depending on system.

So really, this is just another case of people playing a garbage system if this is something that actually happens.

There are rules for trying to lift objects of weight, however.

This is why good systems have crit ranges (both fail and success) that change based on the character's current skill. Like BRP/RQ with its crit success range of 1/10th your skill rating and a crit fail range that shrinks at extremely high skill. GURPS also does this.

Let's make sure that we tried standard RPG problem solving procedure:
1. Have you tried not playing D&D?
If yes:
Is problem still present?

What's the cutoff, you strawmanning fucktard? 1 point of STR lower, you don't even get to attempt after the strong guy has a shitty roll?

2 STR lower? Three? Four?

Equal or lower STR, yes. If the strongman couldn't lift it then it means you need more strength than he had.

Or a better grip, or...

There's a million things that not being able to lift it could mean. I'm really fucking glad I'll never play with a retard like you. Same fucking STR can't even roll my goddamn ass.

>d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm
The above is a chart that tells you what your carrying capacity will be based on the STR of your character.

A character with 18 STR will have a light load of

Next time ask if you can "take 10" or "take 20". Explain that your character is sizing up the task carefully, finding the best grip points, timing their breathing, and focusing fully on the task at hand.

If not playing D&D, ask about circumstantial modifiers or just doing (without a roll) a normal human feat when not stressed. Most games with dice rolls really intend to reserve them for stressful situations, like in the middle of combat, or racing to pull open a grate before a guard rounds a corner.

>try to make tanky Paladin character
>get one-shotted by crab people

>Playing games where dice karma is more important than skill.
You stop that shit now. Luck is good and a pivotal part of a lot of games, but you should succeed more often than not if you're optimized.

Oh look! this thread again. This thread that is posted everyday, by the same may may fag.

That's what I like about Dungeon World. You get to do what your character's good at but if you roll poorly something bad happens. Bad rolls don't make you look incompetent, they just make you look unlucky.

You need 25 STR to roll for this.
Your char has 16 STR.
How about every strength-related dice you roll will have a +16?

What's the 25 for? Putting cracks on the great wall of china, I hope.

What are you doing that requires 25 strength?

Are you trying to crack a mountain in half of something?

Brushing my teeth with diamond-plated toothbrush for the perfectly pearly-white shine.

>Waaaa, I'm not being the ____ of the party this time, I can't have fun anymore!
>Waaaa, only I get to be ____! Nobody else!
>And if I can't, nobody else can!
You're strongman has a fragile fucking morale, one that revolves around him being the best. This is bad and hampers fun for everyone in the party.

Everyone should be able to do everything, if they mechanically can, and roleplay it accordingly. Strongest guy just hefts it, second strongest has to use technique he saw a while ago, while the weakest pushes himself and nearly breaks, but barely makes it. And that's the great roleplay of it. Everyone solves the same problem, but describes it in a different way, specifically appropriate to them. Strongman does it most time, and the others do it sometimes, but if they can do it, they're free to do it.

It's kinda funny, as our DM you'd say our warrior isn't allowed to even try charisma stuff when our warlock fails, even though she still wants to try because she wants to roleplay a different approach to convincing the npc.

>If you can't handle being forced to deal with your weaknesses then you're obviously more of a rollplayer than the guy who wants to succeed at doing the job he was built around doing.
>having a +4 to someones +5 is a weakness
>this +4 means you can't succeed if they've failed
>Even if success is very attainable for both of you
>Success = only way to have fun
>Calls others rollplayers, when he himself forces people to be rollplayers if they want to do things, because fuck roleplaying being weak but still trying

>if the strongest member of the party is unable to lift a heavy object then it stands to reason that anyone who is weaker than him won't be able to lift it either
>20 & 19 STR lift similar loads
>approach thing they can both lift with effort
>If 20 can't lift the thing they can both lift, then it's impossible for 19 to lift it, obviously, 20 didn't just give it a mediocre try that time
>autism

What am I wrestling fucking Grendel or something

Dumb example. Would you guys be more comfortable with a "you need 17 STR"?

I'd rather have a "we're not playing DnD anymore. Here's a better system I found where this kind of dumb shit isn't hard-coded to make your character concept suffer."

Perhaps you were only a large gent relative to the size of the people in question?

There's a lot of legitimate non-buzz-wordy autism in here.

Yeah, I think it's dumb too, anyways. I'd rather have my players think and make their choices count.
I mean, you stumble across a troll that wants you to solve a riddle for you to get pass through him and you roll a dice just to get away with it, without taking some of your time to think a little bit which may be the answer? I'll have none of that bullshit.

If you're going to play a character smarter than yourself, you need to have a way to succeed at matters relevant to intelligence.

I can see how solving riddles sometimes can be fun and if the GM bothered to come up with one, you owe it to him to at least try (unless he bombards you with the stupid things where it's really just tedious). But ultimately it's like all the other skills. The fact that you, the player, are bad at something doesn't mean that your character should be.
I remember on game where I had the lowest intelligence score of the group but I still had to solve all the riddles because they were beyond the ability of my co-players to solve and I was too young and eager to say that my character wasn't the type to sit down and figure that shit out.

I think I preferred coming up with absurd things that one would need 25 strength for.

Let me put this in a way that even you can understand.

Now, this is going to be hyperbole but let's say that the strongest person in the party is Superman. Superman, in canon, was able to lift a book of infinite pages and a being that was a physical manifestation of time itself (whose weight was also infinite).

So, based on that, if there was an object that even Superman couldn't lift, it stands to reason that nobody else in the justice league would be able to lift it either, except for maybe WW or Shazam since they also were able to lift infinity as well.

I don't give a fuck about how you'd try to bullshit your way past this limitation but how much your character could lift is hard coded into the rules and even losing one point of STR will cause you to immediately start to slack off in a significant way, as seen here If you want to be able to show up the strongest dude in the party, either use magic or invent some sort of crane, or play a better system.

>Superman
>used for any comparison ever
I mean, let's forget that Supe's strength is different with every different plot. The difference between a human's strength a human's strength and Supe's is slightly bigger than between two humans.
As has been pointed out in this thread numerous times, just because you can theoretically lift a particular weight, doesn't mean you can do it every time and under sub-optimal conditions.
The human body is a very complicated machine, not a mathematical construct.
You may quote the rules, but those same rules also permit strength rolls.

If anyone who rolls a good STR roll is capable of lifting the heavy object then what's the point of even having the highest STR in the party?

It's already hard as fuck to feel like a powerful character when the game hamstrings you at every opportunity but now you're going to tell me that the one niche that I can say that have a strong claim on doesn't even matter since everyone in the party can roll a good STR and say "oh hey, I did it" regardless of how much sense it makes within the context of the narrative?

Fuck off!

If the strongest guy in the party can't lift it, assume that it's heavier than anyone else can lift unless they have the same STR score and try to lift it using other means, such as magic or technology, as was previously stated.

Don't like it? Play a system where this isn't even an issue.

>Everyone should be able to do everything, if they mechanically can
There would be literally no point into being skilled into anything if it means that different ways of saying something still gets me the same results. God forbid some people in a party do things others cant, right?

What's the problem here?

The point is that every action that carries a chance for failure requires a dice roll.

Just because you have the STR required to lift an object doesn't mean you automatically succeed. Maybe the rock is slippery and you can't hold onto it properly. Even great athletes fuck up and injure themselves sometimes.

This.

>anyone
I didn't say anyone. You keep trying your hand at slippery slope. First Superman vs man, now strongest vs weakest, both to argue that even a difference of 1 point should bar you from even trying.
>what's the point of even having the highest STR in the party?
A number of advantages come with high strength scores, even if you aren't the only one capable of smashing doors to pieces. But even with the doors, you still can do it better than the others. I'll also point you to my previous post .
Read it and stop being silly.

In order to play a big strong guy, OP, you can't just try to muscle things. You have to have a master plan.

>There would be literally no point into being skilled into anythin
>there is no point in working out and being able to run 20 miles without taking a break if other people can just take breaks and finish the race a lot later
Okay.