What determines the quality of pieces one writes?

[Hoihe]

So!

Perform determines the ability to well, perform it. Right technique for a song, right technique for telling a story with pauses et all.

But what determines ability to write it? Since you can take 20 with perform, and when writing you can keep retrying until it works out, doesn't that mean every piece of art that isn't a live performance is considered 20 + ranks given enough time worked on it?

[wangxiuming]

As far as I understand it, perform governs acts with live audiences. Since writing typically does not involve an audience, I don't think perform would be the right check to make, imo. I would think that the appropriate check would depend on the subject matter of the writing, possibly a CHA check for artistic endeavors.

[Steve]

Skill points shouldn't be counted upon as definite "I have 20 skillz so I can write sub-Mozart concert..." kinda rating system.

Skill points are related to use against a Difficulty.

Another way to say it is, based on a low DC rating, a Character with 1 skill points could roll a 20 + modifiers and actually win, thus...write a concert worthy of Mozart.

Personally—well, I guess the above is also a personal viewpoint from DMing—thinking that certain Ranks guarantee a certain result, is not how to look at it. The modifier for Inspiration is phenomenal! Because, even a Character with 30 points in diplomacy may fail in the situation, if the DC is set at 51.


Don't forget:

Skill Checks

A skill check takes into account a character’s training (skill rank), natural talent (ability modifier), and luck (the die roll).

[Mork]

I'd roll a dice of "write something yourself and DM will rate it"k20.
I'd consider oversimplification role-playing an artist as player without skills to write anything close to poem. If someone can't and simply wants to rely on dice I'd just say: re-roll char.
Sure player's don't have to be able to play the lute or mandoline as bards, but writing something seems way to basic ability to leave it to dice.

[Flasmix]

Well if I learned anything from the Wheel of Time series, good writing is determined by how much braid tugging and skirt smoothing which takes place.

[Hoihe]

I'd roll a dice of "write something yourself and DM will rate it"k20.
I'd consider oversimplification role-playing an artist as player without skills to write anything close to poem. If someone can't and simply wants to rely on dice I'd just say: re-roll char.
Sure player's don't have to be able to play the lute or mandoline as bards, but writing something seems way to basic ability to leave it to dice.

I'm approaching it rather from the angle of, "How do I mechanically justify this venue of RP?"

We are, after all, required to play our sheets. As such, when playing a certain kind of character, the sheet should, within limits of the system's scope, have the statistics to justify such a character's achievements and behavior.

It's not so much a question of "If I have X in perform, can I rival Petőfi in leading a rebellion through inspiring courage and love in my fellow warriors" but rather "I often write poetry in imitation of a Petőfi poem that while not as great as the original's, it can be assumed to be good for sake of RP, and my roleplay reflects the idea of an inspiring poet giving people the desire to fight. How should I build my character so that I can justify this character?"



From what I understand, a good modifier in intelligence & diplomacy/intimidate/bluff (vocabulary), charisma (evoking emotions) and wisdom (drawing inspiration from the world around one) is what makes a poet, although certain aspects can be overwhelmed by the others. Especially considering most bards in D&D and even in real life have shitty wisdom (to continue using Petőfi, dude was a frail and sickly guy who demanded to fight on the frontline despite everyone telling him to stay put), yet still draw inspiration from the weirdest subjects.


I guess it makes sense that poetry comes out as more of a talent than training, seeing how some of the "trained" poems seem stilted.

[Planehopper]

I'd roll a dice of "write something yourself and DM will rate it"k20.
I'd consider oversimplification role-playing an artist as player without skills to write anything close to poem. If someone can't and simply wants to rely on dice I'd just say: re-roll char.
Sure player's don't have to be able to play the lute or mandoline as bards, but writing something seems way to basic ability to leave it to dice.

While it would be nice to have some semblance of talent, I whole heartedly disagree. It makes no sense to forgive some player shortcomings such as a lack of magic, inability to pick locks, or track game.. and require another, by telling them to reroll if they can't write.

Further, you are asking a DM to judge an artistic endeavor which they may be (likely are) wholly unqualified to judge from a "standards" viewpoint, as well as relying on one opinion for what is an entirely subjective result.

In this case I would likely fall back on perform combined perhaps with a lore skill tied to the subject matter if a piece of nonfiction. Or Diplomacy if a persuasive piece, etc. It may not be ideal, but it's really all that is there.

[Mork]

We are, after all, required to play our sheets. As such, when playing a certain kind of character, the sheet should, within limits of the system's scope, have the statistics to justify such a character's achievements and behavior.

There is no need to have statistics for absolutely everything. It kind of reminds me of one situation from another server with much higher RP standards than our. Party was building a raft to move through some waters. In theory we had a char with lots of points in crafting but guy roleplayed a character that would have absolutely no background that explained how to build a raft. On the other hand my character was a sailor but had 0 skills in craft. DM decided and I agreed that its best if team follow my characters lead on how to build it due to background alone.

I'd go step further and say it gets quite frustrating when DM-s rely on diplomacy/bluff/intimidate rolls only no matter how convincing actual role-play of dialogue is. Mechanics will never be close to accounting for something like well-preformed speech or like in your case quality of written text. Don't go that route neither as a player or DM. Rolls should be always secondary thing to consider if there are other more logical arguments that can support positive outcome of an action.