Part of what makes various activities in Dungeons & Dragons enjoyable to me is how I am making decisions to overcome challenges.
When I’m not making decisions, the game suffers. D&D combat is full of decision points. Although the basic structure of "I hit the dragon with my sword" is simple, there is a host of context around it that makes it not the only decision for your action.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
Where I find D&D (and other TTRPGs) get into trouble is in situations that rely too heavily on PC knowledge and don’t have that framework of decision points. A locked door can be solved by breaking it down, setting it on fire, picking the lock, bribing the lockmaker for the key, etc. There are options the players can explore.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
However, imagine a challenge from a game where the adventure lays forth exactly what rolls you must succeed at, and there is no choice as to the method. There’s no decision to make there, and the game suffers as a result. This is an issue I ran into during a Star Trek scenario, but it's not unique to that. Though Star Trek tends to be worse because the problem and the solution are "technobabble" with no relation to any world the players are familiar with.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
The issue of why we have dice in combat and don’t use dice when talking to NPCs is more of a stylistic thing. There are several ways of approaching it, which are extremely group dependent. You can roll a single check to see if you succeed.
You can role-play the entire thing out.
You can have a structured "social combat" system.All are valid approaches, but not all are valid for every group.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
The main problem with role-playing it out is that some groups aren’t very good at that.
There are several problems with a structured “social combat” approach – it can be very complex to set up, it might not properly represent what’s going on, and it doesn’t feel like negotiation Honestly, that last is one of the reasons "social combat" doesn't work for me. It becomes too abstract.
I can imagine what happens when a sword is swung, and how to interpret the dice roll. But if you've succeeded on a Persuasion check, what did you actually say? Hmm.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
That was the trouble I had with most 4E skill challenges – they devolved into dice rolling with whatever skill seemed appropriate, but the context of what was going on was lost. (Some did work, though, and they tended to be more complex). I love enabling players to play characters that don't represent their strengths. I see no problem in a player who isn't great at speaking playing a high-Charisma bard and doing well. It's my job as the DM to facilitate that.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
But it needs to be done in a way that the group understand what is going on. Where the players do make decisions. Why are you using that skill instead of another and what does it represent? Those are important questions for me. At time when the players are really stuck as the approach to take, I can suggest options that the characters would think of and the players can choose between.
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) August 2, 2021
