The ER Thread and Feat (Discussion)

[Razgriz]

Even though he still needs like 24,444 XP to reach it, by 33 level, I am (or was) considering taking certain bonus epic feat for Holance. Since he will be leveling up as paladin, this time he gets two feats so one can be to make him more efficient in combat, and the other I guess to give him some flavor as a paladin / Weapon Master that has been around and involved for 8 years in Cormyr. Yes, most of you likely know what feat it is.



Anyway... Enough about Hoho!

I reconsidered and he is not taking the feat.



This thread is about frc.proboards.com/thread/12017/epic-reputation Yes, that.

Does this feat really matter? Do the DMs really mind it for their stories? Who should have it? Should owners of "Epic Reputation" worthy characters be the ones who decide taking the feat? Questions...

Although an application sent to the DMS would not make much sense and then a poll asking the rest of the community if the characters earned the feat could work, it really does not. We all have favorites and then there are characters not many have heard of or that we do not find all that interesting.

From the list of characters there, most of them belong there, save for one that in my opinion, does not. For obvious reasons, and to avoid opening a can of rotten worms, I'm not giving names. Yet that is the problem.

I could roll a new character, grind away until level 21 for a month, take the feat and say that character is well known everywhere. Yay, welcome to the club of those few that took a RP feat over one that affects combat and survivality...and that is all there is to it.

Of course the other players, DMS and other characters themselves are the judges in the end, but the system for epic reputation is still flawed. The thread itself seems to be have been made because a DM at the time considered that the feat was appropriate for his character. As crude as it seems to be, I guess the number of "likes" after posting and announcing that your character took the feat is the real indicator of overal community approval. The older characters were there before the "like" feature of proboards, though.

Now, the existance of the thread bothers me not and nor do the characters part of the list. Even so, this feat would only truly work if the DMs themselves over the course of a campaign, decided what class, stats, skills and feats is taking the character upon leveling up each time. If anyone can choose cleave freely, anyone can choose epic reputation too. Who cares?

The list is maybe not all that special. The list should not be based on who has the feat and who does not. Epic reputation is not something one unlocks or learns, but something earned by the character and the award is ultimately being remembered and being the topic of conversation even if the character itself is no longer around. Those who should have it do not, and those who are considering it, are honestly better off without it. Perhaps this feat should really be considered and called EPIC ADVENTURER REPUTATION, rather than Epic Character Reputation.

Thoughts?

[Ruin]

So every DM/EDM has their own style. The Epic Reputation feat has been discussed from what I seen before. There has been ideas of how to work it.

I know there has been players how have utilized this feat in their epic levels which deserves some praise. However, it is not something I would personally put in my characters.

I believe it goes both ways as you say. There is a juggling act involved:

- Make character > Get epic > Slap on ER Feat. Pros: You are now epic! Cons: You really never did much RP in game to receive it.

- A player might not have much time to play and maybe they RP a lot outside the DM radar. They don't do a lot of events. Do they use the ER feat to counter that?

The issue I see with the ER feat is that it can kinda be forced upon other players. It does nothing to affect another player really except for.. "OOoH.. They are Well known!"

A player posts in there description that they have the feat, but players come and go. I seen this in a description, and I have tried to research the character , regarding their 'epicness'. I can then try and RP accordingly.

With the ER feat, there would need some extra accountability on the players part. They would need to show some initiative and detail out how they gained the feat. I seen a forum thread on the epic characters in FRC.

Runa is known throughout the Western Reach. I am sure her name reaches some ears. But in know way is she of epic proportion.

My point is, FRC is in Cormyr and barely outside the borders. What is the limitations for a character to be of epic material, regardless of level.

Can a character gain epic reputation before 20th? Possible!

For me, my thoughts are to not utilize the feat, even for Roleplay. I think mechanically it's a waste of time and Roleplay wise it is also a waste of time as it sorta forces player to grind for the Epic Reputation making Epic levels/ mechanics the primary source for gaining ER.

Also, as an EDM I could my best to offer some sort of RP extra for those who take the feat, but how many times would I cater to that when doing my events and such? Is it worth the feat? To me it's not.

Some suggestions have been made to see it given out as a token , instead of a feat. Make Epic Reputation something the staff could vote on. :3

[Lady Frost]

I think you're looking into it too much. As a mostly RP feat, I think the community judges it on their own. If you take it without justification, people will generally ignore it. If a DM doesn't care for the skill roll, they'll ignore it. Zodika has both had skill rolls ignored and had very important IG decisions based on skill rolls. I assume when her skill rolls are accepted it because the DM feels like it's appropriate. If someone grinded to epic and took Epic Reputation and started trying to use it with NPC's I'd assume it'd be ignored. Similarly, characters like Darkharp who don't have it, but deserve it, are generally treated as they have it even though they don't.

[Razgriz]

Oct 14, 2020 15:24:15 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

I think you're looking into it too much. As a mostly RP feat, I think the community judges it on their own. If you take it without justification, people will generally ignore it. If a DM doesn't care for the skill roll, they'll ignore it. Zodika has both had skill rolls ignored and had very important IG decisions based on skill rolls. I assume when her skill rolls are accepted it because the DM feels like it's appropriate. If someone grinded to epic and took Epic Reputation and started trying to use it with NPC's I'd assume it'd be ignored. Similarly, characters like Darkharp who don't have it, but deserve it, are generally treated as they have it even though they don't.

Yeah, perhaps so. Perhaps it is similar to what happens with the RP skills. It is evident who can persuade, taunt and intimidate others through RP, without needing to max out the skills. Yet it is also neat when those who demonstrated that can do it, take the skills.

[Masterbard Alyster Darkharp]

The feat is purely mechanical in NWN providing bonuses to a few skills that can be ignored by unscrupulous characters. It really is a badge more than a feat. How do you put a price or qualifications on a feat that provides a bonus to a few role play skills?

None of this is meant in a negative way. Lots of people simply will not abide by your characters skill checks when they mean that your character gains some small measure of influence over them. That is what it is. Reputation on FRC is earned and not bought at the price of a feat. Can a character do both? Yes. Can they gain the effect without the feat through years of dedicated role play and never get the feat? Yes. I think players should objectively self reflect on wether they truly deserve to wear that badge. Without naming ANY names we can all probably tick off a few people who wear that badge with or without the feat.

[malclave]

Lots of people simply will not abide by your characters skill checks when they mean that your character gains some small measure of influence over them.

I think a lot of that has to do with a fear of godmoding. One person's "small measure of influence" might be another's "remove my ability to play my character". Especially if the influencing character just rolls without first discussing the goal with the target player so a DC can be set.

Intimidate is especially problematic. Not only should it permanently modify the target's attitude (generally speaking) so using the skill twice on the same target makes them Hostile, but any observers might also react negatively. Instead, I've seen supposedly Good-aligned characters just laugh at seeing someone bullied (which is what the skill check represents when it comes down to it).

[Masterbard Alyster Darkharp]

Oct 14, 2020 18:41:04 GMT -5 malclave said:

Lots of people simply will not abide by your characters skill checks when they mean that your character gains some small measure of influence over them.

I think a lot of that has to do with a fear of godmoding. One person's "small measure of influence" might be another's "remove my ability to play my character". Especially if the influencing character just rolls without first discussing the goal with the target player so a DC can be set.

Intimidate is especially problematic. Not only should it permanently modify the target's attitude (generally speaking) so using the skill twice on the same target makes them Hostile, but any observers might also react negatively. Instead, I've seen supposedly Good-aligned characters just laugh at seeing someone bullied (which is what the skill check represents when it comes down to it).

I don't disagree with any of this, as I said my say wasn't a negative one. People have their reasons, but when both people are established roleplayers on frc with credible reputations for fair play, it -should- be less of an issue.

[Southpaw]

For me, what really matters with social skills is the spirit the other player is playing in when they try to use the skills. It is entirely possible the other player is trying to use the skills as a way of fleshing out and giving credibility to a well role played interaction, in the spirit of, "Since I just presented this really great argument as to why you should do what I want, please allow me to back up the fact my character has the ability to make such a great case by showing you the game mechanics I've invested in the skill." That is, for lack of a better way of putting it, to prove that they're not role playing a totally combat built character with no game mechanical social skill as the most convincing character in the world. This use of the skill I respect.

On the other hand, it's theoretically possible that a player has made a powerbuild that is somehow built around charisma, powerlevelled and incessantly grinded their way to an epic level character with little to no character interaction with anyone in a total powergaming mentality, took epic skill focus to pump up their social skill still in a powergaming mentality, used their powergrinded loot to buy some very powerful stat and skill boosting gear, and now as their first interaction with any PC on the server, they're throwing dice in my face expecting me to let them control my own character out from under me as the reward for having powergamed their way into the game mechanics. To put it briefly, this I would not respect.

For me, the more I see that a player is working in the first mode, and the less it seems they are operating in the second mode, the more likely I am to consider their social skill checks and play along accordingly. The more I get the idea they are trying to powergame control of my own character out of my hands, the more likely I am to ignore their social skill checks.

[mandene]

Interesting topic.

Obviously the feat exists, and is implemented for single play or single-party play, and is considered to be usable against NPCs.

Where it comes to the thread, I've discovered it fairly early in my career on FRC. All characters, except for the first one there, are known to me. My main has heard about them through gossip, stories shared with her, and she's met some of them. Differently from most stuff posted about characters on the forums, stuff in that thread can be used as IC information.

However, where's there's fame and reputation, there's also misinformation and gossip (even malicious gossip). The thread doesn't incorporate that, so in the end, the characters that have the epic reputation feat, are partial to the idea of not having their characters affected. I'm not playing a devil's advocate here for those that might not want to be affected by the epic reputation of the characters with the feat - just noticing that while the characters might not reap the positives of the feat, they're not reaping the negatives of it, either. I mean, these characters should be something of the Kardashians of FRC Who's Fiona dating today? What are her thoughts on the peace with orcs? Where's the latest tabloids on Fiona changing her blades for a double-sided morning star? What is the latest scandal Zodika is part of? Didn't someone see Urbucheck arriving at her latest place for some personal whipping-session? Where's my "Card today" sensational story, with pictures of him being miserable and overwheight.

I agree that there's more characters that have gained fame/infamy on FRC, that have never taken that feat. It wouldn't surprise me that some players in the past have taken the feat, but never posted about it. It could be fair to have it based on application, similarly to how some PRCs are gated behind applications. Maybe it could stop players from taking them willy-nilly, and give the DMs a possibility to keep track of these.

[Razgriz]

Oct 15, 2020 7:31:59 GMT -5 mandene said:

I mean, these characters should be something of the Kardashians of FRC

Yeah... now this convinces me of not taking the feat and staying far, far away of anyone with it!

[Southpaw]

I was just looking over the list of epic reputation characters. I think Aris needs to go on the list posthumously. Not only is the Greatgaunt Fire still discussed occasionally after very many turnovers in the current cast of active characters, but he was a widely hated and feared bad guy who was the center of a lot of anti-bad guy activity from multiple guilds for a long time. Salina was up there too for the GG Fire, but Aris kept at the open, publicly known bad dudery long after.

[Asgardian Grey Hawk]

Oct 15, 2020 8:43:46 GMT -5 Southpaw said:

I was just looking over the list of epic reputation characters. I think Aris needs to go on the list posthumously. Not only is the Greatgaunt Fire still discussed occasionally after very many turnovers in the current cast of active characters, but he was a widely hated and feared bad guy who was the center of a lot of anti-bad guy activity from multiple guilds for a long time. Salina was up there too for the GG Fire, but Aris kept at the open, publicly known bad dudery long after.

iv had 3 pcs who are well known without having epic reputation. Granted do I feel they should have had the feat yes. But also as I see it. If you take epic reputation. Your reputation is known far and wide outside of cormyr like drizzy Artemis and Elminster. While I appreciate your call for Aris to be on the list I fear his infamy would not reach out of cormyr. The only PC I have currently that I think would reach outside of cormyr would be vindel.

[ID10Tango]

The way I think about ER:

Some people rise in fame and enjoy a lifetime of celebrity status, while others rocket to the top like a shooting star and fizzle out just as fast. Both are memorable and I feel both are examples of ER.

Since the Kardashians were brought up I'll use that example - *Trigger Warning* - I personally think the Kardashians are worthless, but Bill Nye the Science Guy will always get my time and attention. Both are notable figures, and both are examples of my opinions towards them which shows how the community could (or does, rather) treat the ER feat, which is based entirely on the circumstances of their stardom in tandem with the individual values and perspectives I hold.

So if you want to sit in GG for a decade and RP, or accomplish one monumental task after another, or run circles around the server and find every nook of every dungeon...there's an ER feat for you if you want it. But just because you have the feat (or not) holds no weight in my PC's opinion of yours. So take the feat if you want, or don't...the decision you really need to make is whether or not you want to be the shooting star that fizzles out, or the one that enjoys a lifetime status. I'm not here to tell anyone how to play, but in return I wont accept an "inception" to be planted into my PC's thoughts that is not congruent with his personality or values.

Lastly, and not that this is being argued but I just wanted to mention that ER is inherently neutral. It can represent both a shiny badge on your Paladin armor or a mark of darkness the community won't soon forget, and everything in between. I took my PC off FRC for over 4yrs, and when I brought him back there wasn't a single person (from that time) who forgot about him or what he'd done. He doesn't have the feat, he will never have the feat, I dont want the feat, but nevertheless he is currently (and will continue I suspect) suffering the consequences of his past...because THAT...is ER. Not a forum post, not a feat, not a token...but for better or worse a tangible reputation. It's not up to me who and how that reputation plays out in-game. All I can do is play my game, and let you play yours...


-Tango-

[appleseedy]

I did consider taking epic reputation for Tailor, as has been discussed, people know you or they don't. I liked Mandene's thought about epic negative reputation too. Having the highest perform skill on the server doesn't make me the best performer, lets be realistic i took perform to fuel a mechanical benefit. If i had the highest persuade skill that wouldn't make me persuasive etc etc.

But when i compliment Targamkia on her beauty and all around loveliness and back that up with an investment in bluff points... well that works, anyway i digress. I think the reputation thread should not be written by the character with the feat but allow people to interact with the thread after announcing they have the feat and let that speak for them.

[PhatDorf]

I thought about it on Dreshae too, but when she was at her most well known It was long before she was Epic level, at least I think so - but given how technically she had a fair amount under her belt, I felt I could take it deservedly, but opted not to in the end on the idea that its kinda something you train for and focus on, as a feat? Which she wasn't doing, at least intentionally - and I figured, as many have said above, at the time you likely feel justified in taking it, you perhaps don't need it.

[TrueBlueOriginal]

I thought about taking the feat on Kira, and I still do, because I think her reputation is pretty epic, even if half of it is rumor and speculation.

However, I level-up very very slowly and there are a lot of other feats I'd rather have, that would be far more useful, than one that gives +4 to some social skills she has as class skills anyway. The only reason I'd have for taking the feat is the prestige of having the feat and feeling that her epic reputation is more than just in my head because it's also on her character sheet.

Plus, you know, reputation waxes and wanes, so if I wasn't playing her for awhile and she lost her reputation, then I'd feel like a wannabe for having the feat when she doesn't have the actual reputation to back it up anymore.

Maybe I'll get it some day in a decade or two, when her reputation is really nailed down, and I've picked up a few more valuable feats already.

[Deleted]

I think it's all basically meaningless. Like anything that exists on your character sheet; do it because you want it there, and roleplay what your PC is, reflecting its mechanics.

Nobody else has to care what you took, and they shouldn't. Mechanics and roleplay aren't different things. It's all the same thing and it's all just what you should play.

People have said this, but the issue with social skills, which this is an extension of, is that it all depends on what you can represent. If you can make a convincing roleplay argument, THEN hit me with an impressive roll, my character may well change their mind when they wouldn't otherwise.

If you don't make a convincing case, but hit me with a tricked out roll? I don't care. That's just powergaming by another word.

Basically I'm against Epic Reputation fundamentally, because it does nothing roleplay doesn't do, and should never be "expected" to induce responses in others. Nobody should take it, unless you want the effects of the feat.

[Lady Frost]

Oct 24, 2020 21:57:59 GMT -5 @bluestar said:

If you don't make a convincing case, but hit me with a tricked out roll? I don't care. That's just powergaming by another word.

I understand the point behind this, but I've never really agreed with it. We're roleplaying characters who aren't us. I don't have to RP my character rolling attacks for them to hit. I don't have to RP my character dodging. I don't have to RP appraise when dealing with merchants. How do you even RP 30+ wisdom or intelligence? Do I have to have high dex myself to play high dex characters? Why do we have to be convincing ourselves when we clearly have a character with far more bluff than someone else? If you read about bluff it clearly lays out that the skill circumstances include "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." Convincing characters of crazy things is part of bluff and those characters would clearly have the right words, signals, cues and what else to pull it off. Where I see issues is that the game and players don't know what the various modifiers for some of these things. For example "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." says it comes with a +20 to the DC.

I certainly understand the desire for a player to make an effort, but we also have to understand we aren't playing ourselves and we won't have all the right words that our characters clearly would.

[TrueBlueOriginal]

Oct 25, 2020 0:29:17 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

Oct 24, 2020 21:57:59 GMT -5 @bluestar said:

If you don't make a convincing case, but hit me with a tricked out roll? I don't care. That's just powergaming by another word.

I understand the point behind this, but I've never really agreed with it. We're roleplaying characters who aren't us. I don't have to RP my character rolling attacks for them to hit. I don't have to RP my character dodging. I don't have to RP appraise when dealing with merchants. How do you even RP 30+ wisdom or intelligence? Do I have to have high dex myself to play high dex characters? Why do we have to be convincing ourselves when we clearly have a character with far more bluff than someone else? If you read about bluff it clearly lays out that the skill circumstances include "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." Convincing characters of crazy things is part of bluff and those characters would clearly have the right words, signals, cues and what else to pull it off. Where I see issues is that the game and players don't know what the various modifiers for some of these things. For example "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." says it comes with a +20 to the DC.

I certainly understand the desire for a player to make an effort, but we also have to understand we aren't playing ourselves and we won't have all the right words that our characters clearly would.

Of course you do have to succeed at your attack roll if you're attacking those stupid mosquitoes in the swamp. My character could hit their AC just fine if I could just click on them. They used to have much larger hit-boxes but I get the impression those were removed for "realism." If they're supposed to be that hard to hit, their AC should reflect that, not their hit-box.

As for the social manipulation skills, I think the issue with them is that they're primarily used for PC vs. NPC interactions in D&D because everyone is expected to be, by-and-large, on the same side (the party's side). That doesn't translate so well to a persistent world where there is an expectation of social manipulation PVP. I don't have an answer, I just think the difference in format is worth considering.

[Dimitri]

I'm currently discussing with myself basically... Do I want to take this feat on Dimitri? The answer is yes, but.. does he deserve it? I'm not sure. He leads a(the best) Merc Company, fought in a few wars, has a hefty bounty on him; is pretty well known for his dumb purple hood and clothing and such that he used to always wear... Things that could make him have a Reputation. But at the same time a thread like this makes me uncertain if he really deserves it, compared to some people.

[DOT]

Reputation is a strange thing. I think it affects npcs more than it does pcs because of new pcs coming into the fray. If anything it might give them more leverage during npc interactions or dm events?

[Razgriz]

Oct 25, 2020 0:29:17 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

Oct 24, 2020 21:57:59 GMT -5 @bluestar said:

If you don't make a convincing case, but hit me with a tricked out roll? I don't care. That's just powergaming by another word.

I understand the point behind this, but I've never really agreed with it. We're roleplaying characters who aren't us. I don't have to RP my character rolling attacks for them to hit. I don't have to RP my character dodging. I don't have to RP appraise when dealing with merchants. How do you even RP 30+ wisdom or intelligence? Do I have to have high dex myself to play high dex characters? Why do we have to be convincing ourselves when we clearly have a character with far more bluff than someone else? If you read about bluff it clearly lays out that the skill circumstances include "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." Convincing characters of crazy things is part of bluff and those characters would clearly have the right words, signals, cues and what else to pull it off. Where I see issues is that the game and players don't know what the various modifiers for some of these things. For example "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." says it comes with a +20 to the DC.

I certainly understand the desire for a player to make an effort, but we also have to understand we aren't playing ourselves and we won't have all the right words that our characters clearly would.

Some players are better at emoting and at typing what their character says, I guess. Some type very fast, with perfect grammar, no typos, correct sentence structure and have just the right choice of words. If on top of that their characters have maxed out bluff, intimidate, persuade and taunt, then the result of that in RP can be epic. Not all have that level of skill though.

Despite that, it is still clear when someone is at least making an effort, and when someone is just rolling a dice and showing off how many points in certain skill or atribute were invested.

[Masterbard Alyster Darkharp]

Oct 25, 2020 9:02:38 GMT -5 Razgriz said:

Oct 25, 2020 0:29:17 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

I understand the point behind this, but I've never really agreed with it. We're roleplaying characters who aren't us. I don't have to RP my character rolling attacks for them to hit. I don't have to RP my character dodging. I don't have to RP appraise when dealing with merchants. How do you even RP 30+ wisdom or intelligence? Do I have to have high dex myself to play high dex characters? Why do we have to be convincing ourselves when we clearly have a character with far more bluff than someone else? If you read about bluff it clearly lays out that the skill circumstances include "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." Convincing characters of crazy things is part of bluff and those characters would clearly have the right words, signals, cues and what else to pull it off. Where I see issues is that the game and players don't know what the various modifiers for some of these things. For example "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." says it comes with a +20 to the DC.

I certainly understand the desire for a player to make an effort, but we also have to understand we aren't playing ourselves and we won't have all the right words that our characters clearly would.

Some players are better at emoting and at typing what their character says, I guess. Some type very fast, with perfect grammar, no typos, correct sentence structure and have just the right choice of words. If on top of that their characters have maxed out bluff, intimidate, persuade and taunt, then the result of that in RP can be epic. Not all have that level of skill though.

Despite that, it is still clear when someone is at least making an effort, and when someone is just rolling a dice and showing off how many points in certain skill or atribute were invested.

There has to be a happy medium. It really depends on what type of character you play. If you play a high intelligence scholar, you are never going to be taken seriously if you do not come across as intelligent -until- you throw down a lore or intelligence check. There are different roleplay styles to every character. I think it sometimes comes down to picking some character flaws or traits that make your character memorable, and sticking to them.

I think with bards it's good to pick a gimmick. What is the one style of performance you are known for, what is the signature instrument? Is there a song you wrote that really kickstarted your fame? Were you trained by a particularly well known bard?

I don't have much experience playing other character types in relation to FRC. I played a monk that was not particularly well known for awhile, and otherwise it's been Darkharp. That being said, sometimes the secret to being the best character you can be, is that your character is a part of you. There is a thin line where Darkharp and myself tread. I am particularly interested in toxicology and venom, so is he, I write sad songs and dirges, so does he. I am particularly interested in realmslore an so is he. I believe that people can rise up from obscurity outside of formal schools of learning and become great...and he did.

Some people don't want to play a part of themselves, and I get that. Darkharp is the part of me that wants to be real but can't be. Many people think he has already achieved what it takes to have ER. I am not disputing that, in the end it is certainly the end goal of most bards that they are well known for their art, their accomplishments. At this critical point in his career when he actually is approaching epic level, it's time to up the game. I think -that- captures some of ER as well, at your formative levels what were you doing? When you were 1-5th level what were your strengths you built on, and when you were 16-19th level...what were you doing that people remember you for?

If you never did anything memorable until level 20...well..I don't think people are remembering who you are as much as how badass you are currently.

[Southpaw]

Oct 25, 2020 0:29:17 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

Oct 24, 2020 21:57:59 GMT -5 @bluestar said:

If you don't make a convincing case, but hit me with a tricked out roll? I don't care. That's just powergaming by another word.

I understand the point behind this, but I've never really agreed with it. We're roleplaying characters who aren't us. I don't have to RP my character rolling attacks for them to hit. I don't have to RP my character dodging. I don't have to RP appraise when dealing with merchants. How do you even RP 30+ wisdom or intelligence? Do I have to have high dex myself to play high dex characters? Why do we have to be convincing ourselves when we clearly have a character with far more bluff than someone else? If you read about bluff it clearly lays out that the skill circumstances include "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." Convincing characters of crazy things is part of bluff and those characters would clearly have the right words, signals, cues and what else to pull it off. Where I see issues is that the game and players don't know what the various modifiers for some of these things. For example "The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider." says it comes with a +20 to the DC.

I certainly understand the desire for a player to make an effort, but we also have to understand we aren't playing ourselves and we won't have all the right words that our characters clearly would.

I think this is something where a reasonable balance needs to be struck, and I get the idea that Bluestar is kind of speaking to one side of that, if I understand correctly.  You do actually role play your character's decisions in battle, btw, by clicking on the target you want to attack, weapon selection, etc.  In social interactions, you could look at certain basic choices as your "tactics," like making a gift to someone you want to influence, or perhaps referring to certain exploits you know they're proud of.  A character might like the mention of exploits more than a gift, and it might make the persuasion harder or easier accordingly.  But above all, it gives the other player at least an idea what "target you're clicking on," to use a combat analogy, and what "weapon you've selected," in determining whether you hit and how much damage you do.  I think enough role play to get a good idea what your PC is trying to do and how is a reasonable expectation, and a reasonable balance.

[Animayhem]

Clarification please.  I believe there is a thread for epic characters to write about their achievements?  If so do they have to actually take the epic feat in game or just support their claims by siting actual in game experiences.

[Lady Frost]

Oct 25, 2020 19:19:11 GMT -5 Animayhem said:

Clarification please.  I believe there is a thread for epic characters to write about their achievements?  If so do they have to actually take the epic feat in game or just support their claims by siting actual in game experiences.

You mean the Epic Reputation thread? That specific thread was made for those with the feat. If there's another thread, it's not ringing a bell to me.

[Animayhem]

Oct 25, 2020 20:54:07 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

Oct 25, 2020 19:19:11 GMT -5 Animayhem said:

Clarification please.  I believe there is a thread for epic characters to write about their achievements?  If so do they have to actually take the epic feat in game or just support their claims by siting actual in game experiences.

You mean the Epic Reputation thread? That specific thread was made for those with the feat. If there's another thread, it's not ringing a bell to me.

Thank you for clarifying. That was the thread I was referring to.