One more house rule that I have adopted and so far like—and one more where credit to Noam is necessary—covers interactions between PCs. Specifically those social interactions where there’s no evident opposed check.
To provide some context, one of my goals is to enable players to play high-Charisma characters even if they aren’t such great improvisers or actors to be able to roleplay it. I keep reminding myself to be as open to players who want to describe what they do in social situations as to those who act it out. After all, I’m not asking anyone to actually pick the lock or fire the arrow, so why ask them to really hold a crowd’s rapt attention?
(One thing I’m not a huge fan of is rolling the social check first then playing the scene based on it. Part of the reason is that I don’t necessarily know how to act more persuasive just because I rolled high. Another part is that I also wouldn’t call for an Strength roll before deciding how you push the rock out of the way: the way you approach the problem could influence the DC, grant advantage or disadvantage, or even eliminate the roll entirely. So you could say “I want to try to distract the guard, mislead them somehow.” But you could also say “I want to tell them there’s a fight around the corner” as the Wizard prestidigitates the sounds of fighting—or you could say in character: “Oh thank Kord, there’s a fight! Come quick!” Either way it’s a Deception roll, but the circumstances change.)
When PCs are interacting with NPCs, I have all sorts of tools to resolve those interactions. But sometimes PCs interact with each other (gasp!).
For physical situations there’s usually some way to resolve those intra-PC interactions. If one is trying to grab another, that’s a straightforward Grapple. If someone wants to punch a fellow party member, roll an Attack. Trying to sneak away or palm something? Stealth or Sleight of Hand versus Perception.
Social situations are tougher—and this makes sense, since roleplay is a distinct pillar of the game. There are some directly opposed skills: if one PC is lying to another, there are specific skills to cover that. Liar, make a Deception check; liee(?) make an Insight check. Done and dusted. But there are a number where no opposition makes sense. How do I Intimidate someone else, or Persuade them? Should it be against their Wisdom (which older editions connected to “Will”)? Or their Charisma, which represents, per the PHB, “force of personality”?
In an interaction with an NPC, I would set a DC for Intimidation or Persuasion, based on a number of things. I wouldn’t roll like I would for Deception vs Insight. Why not apply the same thing to PCs?
So if a PC is trying to talk another PC into something, I’ll let the person being persuaded set the DC for a role. Usually that person decides that this is how it should be resolved. “Convince me.” The persuader might also make the offer: “I want to try to convince Panlan.” I might bring it up if there seems to be an impasse but wouldn’t force it.
There are two restrictions.
First, unless there are exceptional circumstances, the DC has to be between 10 and 20. (If the player isn’t accustomed to setting DCs, I’ll ask them “easy, medium, or hard” and use that to suggest 10, 15, or 20, respectively. For players who also DM and are more familiar with it, I’m OK with them setting it at 12 or 18 or whatever in that range.) Higher than 20 and it stretches belief that there is anything that could convince you.
Second, you have to state the DC before the roll—or that there’s no way. I like to think players would give each other the benefit of the doubt there, but I want to avoid any doubt or suspicion.
For this to work, a couple of things have to be true. The player setting the DC has to be setting it reasonably and in good faith—and be willing to respect the result. Players have to be bought into this as a resolution method. Finally, I insist that the person taking the active role is making the roll.
(I was going to use an example of the active person rolling like: I wouldn’t use passive Deception vs active Insight for a lie. But I wouldn’t use this system for intra-PC Deception/Insight anyway. I could imagine using passive Insight, I suppose.)
Of course this isn’t for every table. If all the players are happier roleplaying out the conversation, great! But not everyone is, and as a DM and as someone who is not a good actor and who plays a character who is far more charming than I am, I think it’s important to enable playing characters who are better actors than we are, just like the better athletes or pickpockets or history experts. This is one tool in that toolbox.
James DM 