Skill Check Rolling

[el groso]

You should roll skill check only if requested by a DM. It is not against the rules to roll without being requested, but it's good for nothing other than OOCly show off your skill, for it doesn't work as emoting anything, and irritating your fellow players. Maybe rolling appraise checks, intimidation, etc, could give a hint as to what you're trying to use, but it is not a tool to automatically convince people of something. It doesn't work like that.

[Inquisitor]

Actually, I'd like it if players could roll some general personality checks if they're actively trying to persuade a player. Obviously, the RP must match the attempt. (IE: You can't say, "Give me yo' sandwich" and expect it to be overly intimidating, unless you're in jail or somethin, even if you have 20 intimidate.)

I can think of times, say, where PCs took extra loot in a quest and when confronted on it, blatantly denied it, without really RPing bluff skills, or lack thereof. The skills are there for a reason! If your PC is supposed to be scary, persuasive, or a liar; take the skills. It doesn't hurt to roll them during certain situations and let other PCs decide how they'll react.

[The Band Played On]

It's fine to roll to show that your character is good at a social skill, but it doesn't in any way bind the player of the other characters who see the roll into reacting to it. As long as the player making the roll realizes that the other players can ignore it, and they also realize that they have no right to complain or critique that the roll is ignored, then rolling is harmless.

[Abandoned-1]

I roll sometimes, but I really think it comes down to common sense. I used to DM on a server where one player based all their roleplay on rolling. There were a lot of people at the time, so having everyone roll became slightly excessive. The only times I really roll are if there's a DM encounter, and they allow me to catch a glimpse of the NPC they possessed, or if I need to lie. However, when your rolling is used to roll a wisdom and persuade check to convince everyone to attack a clearly more powerful dragon that everyone is afraid of... that's where I put my foot down.

[Abandoned-1]

I should point out that just because you roll a successful bluff, doesn't mean I have to believe your lie. Especially if I know the truth of the matter. You're not going to convince me that my mother is really your mother.

[Ebok]

Sometimes the roll gives me as a player a better understanding of what the other guy is attempting to do. I enjoy it now and then, when the conversation gets muddled or starts to fall into a stale mate. I know I have been more courteous in my reactions to, at least, intimidation when a roll was made to show actual investment.

Sometimes a skill roll can help create a tone that a person may not have been portraying well. I would also react much worse to someone whom I thought was just talking suddenly rolling intimidation checks. So there is a time and place to use these well. I see the PC to PC use as something of equivalent of an EMOTE.

I do not suggest anyone after making a horrible and obvious LIE try to weasel  out by making a bluff check. Likewise any conversation that has come to an unsatisfactory conclusion is not the time nor place to start revealing that you're suppose to be good at this. HOWEVER, flavorful use during stalemates or during another characters pondering.

[Zango_Unchained]

They see me rolling.. they hating..
 
I suggest that you only use rolls when asked to by a DM, or in a flavor situation, thats my take on it personally.

[Paha]

You can roll all you want, but nobody is enforced to recognize or follow rolls. They will play as is appropriate for them, unless DM has a reason to enforce rolls.

This is where we stand.

[shards]

Sometimes the roll gives me as a player a better understanding of what the other guy is attempting to do. I enjoy it now and then, when the conversation gets muddled or starts to fall into a stale mate. I know I have been more courteous in my reactions to, at least, intimidation when a roll was made to show actual investment.

Sometimes a skill roll can help create a tone that a person may not have been portraying well. I would also react much worse to someone whom I thought was just talking suddenly rolling intimidation checks. So there is a time and place to use these well. I see the PC to PC use as something of equivalent of an EMOTE.

I do not suggest anyone after making a horrible and obvious LIE try to weasel  out by making a bluff check. Likewise any conversation that has come to an unsatisfactory conclusion is not the time nor place to start revealing that you're suppose to be good at this. HOWEVER, flavorful use during stalemates or during another characters pondering.

This!

And I would like to emphasize that rolling skill checks will not necessarily irritate fellow players.

[Vlaid]

Rolls are fine, as long as you realize they hold no power without a DM. Simply showcasing your investment in a skill to another player.

And sometimes it can be fun to roll your LEGENDARY skill check, to show how awesome you are at something.

[Aefar]

I play character with high intelligence and low wisdom. Clever smartass. When I have to do something really clever but unpopullar (like make a riddle to leave the daemon from its prison) as a role play, I feel the need to show other players, that I am not dumb, that it is only role play of this rush character which is seeing interesting riddle but do not see any conseqences of her doing.

That's why I use the roll check after such action time to time.

[putrid_plum]

It can be great to help portray your characters skills or personality by showing you actually invested in a skill or stat.  People aren't forced to follow it nor should they but it might give them a better understand of your character too.  I don't think it should happen often but it does have it's place.

[Amari001]

Its better to show off character. There's a famous proverb about it "Character is that activity when you think that no one is seeing you". So always try to prove that you belong to a noble and generous family.

[Garem]

+1, OP.

Theoretically, I'd abide by Ebok's standard.

Do rolls only to show me that you're trying to trick me. If you give me a colorable argument, I might let it slide.

I've never actually seen someone do this. Everyone I've seen does these rolls to show off.

Which, to be perfectly candid, is extremely unappealing to me. If you want to brag about some impressive mechanical feat, use tells. Don't clog up my chat log, bro.

If you want to show something about a nonphysical trait, talk.
If you want to show a physical trait, emote and/or do something.

On a similar note, I'm extremely impressed with how rare OOC jabber occurs these days in regular chat mode. It's just wonderfully immersive.

[Master of Puppets]

I don't know...deep down this is still D&D? My take on it the rolls should be made, then acted out. Example. I tried to throw a dead fish or something at someone. Rolled a dex check. Critical failure. So I "tripped and fell" down the stairs.
 
Sure no one /has/ to acknowledge the rolls, but isn't that kinda the point? If my PC has 20 bluff and your PC has 8 WIS....theoretically you /could/ be made to believe my mother is your mother.
 
I miss the good old days when a 1 roll did crazy things like make you cut your finger off...