Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by Dagless
Or you let them try a persuasion check, because that's a normal thing for a player to attempt.
I disrespectfully disagree ...

Its normal thing for player to come up with what they would like to do ... but its also normal thing for DM to keep those things in check.

Rogue cant roll for Sleight of Hands to steal a Moon.
Commoner cant Persuate king to give him the crown and title.
Barbarian cant roll Atletic to snap grown tree in half with two fingers.
Wizard cant roll Arcana to invent spell that would instantly kill everything in the dungeon.

Those are things that simply are-not-possible ...
And its your responsibility as a DM to set bar on what is possible, and what isnt.

Originally Posted by Dagless
Succeeding doesn't make him do what they want, but it makes him look more favorably on them and maybe not arrest them for high treason or something.
If that is how you want to DM ... its your choice.
All i can say is that i would walk away from such table, bcs it smells like railroading ... and i dont like railroading.

When i roll for something, its bcs i want that thing to happen ...
When you dont want that thing to happen, simply dont let me roll ... by allowing roll, you allowed the thing to happen ... that is whole purpose of that roll.

I mean ... w/e really ... do it this way, if you want to, you will learn in time ...
Just do a favor to yourself, and each time you give your players this "different" outcome ... ask them after the session end, how they felt about it ... and if they wouldnt rather preffer you to simply tell them that is not possible and move on.
You may be surprised. wink

I’ve not played in a long time, but when I did the thing we liked about it was the freedom to do unexpected things and sometimes ridiculous things (our first role playing game).

So a barbarian might try to snap a tree with two fingers if they were incredibly drunk, and it was in character to try to prove how strong they were. Our DM would probably let us roll to see how much of an arse they’d make of themselves. It would be obvious to the player it wouldn’t actually work because it wasn’t possible.

I don’t see how something like that is being “railroaded” more than the DM just saying no?

Anyway, that’s all a bit off topic. BG3 a video game where we don’t have infinite choices for such things, In this case it’s a roll that the story has led us to believe is possible, until we attempt it. There’s a roll to show it’s a battle of the minds, using the system we are used to, but they make it a 99 to tell us how hopelessly outmatched we are and that it was a futile effort. That seems fine to me.

Quote
Originally Posted by Dagless
Apparently it weakens it a bit in the boss fight.
Dont seem to be so "apparent" when i needed to ask, does it?

Well it is the whole point of the thread, stated in the OP and shown in the video.

It’s not very apparent at the time of making the roll though.

Last edited by Dagless; 22/04/24 07:46 PM.