What if the DM ask for rumormonger?


Advice


So, you and your party wants to spread a rumor in a city. The party have high bluff, diplomacy and intimidate. You also have access to several hat of disguises, charm/compulsion and illusions spells, and you plan to use them all to achieve your goal..., but then the DM say "sorry, there is a mechanics for that, and none of you have the rumormonger rogue talent". What would be you do?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

As a GM I say, screw that. Whats the rumor? I'll tell you how I'd run it.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Go and whine on forums.


Gorbacz wrote:
Go and whine on forums.

^ That. Then activate your barbarian rage power and use your newfound strength to hurl your DM from the kingdom and usurp the throne. Huzzah! Long live the new DM!

Or uhh... you know. Do something sane. Maybe ask why only 10th level rogues who take a certain feat are allowed to spread rumors, despite you having everything else you could possibly need and more. Rumormonger is just one of those special things that somehow makes everything else worse by existing and sucks on its own even.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Laugh at how the Rogue is so bad it nerfed the bluff skill.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The rumormonger talent allows a rogue to make a single successful Bluff check to start a rumor. That single check probably stands in for multiple interactions. Mechanically, though, it's easy-peasy.

That doesn't mean only mid to high level rogues have the ability to start rumors, though. Were that the case, any time a PC party wanted to make contact with a local thieves guild, they'd need do no more than find out who the area's biggest gossip was. Anyone can try to start a rumor--rogues with that talent simply can do so with very little effort.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rumormonger is an 10th+ level ability (Advanced Talent Rogue ability) that lets you spread a rumor with the following attributes:
- Single bluff check
- Success = rumor is accepted as fact by the community

Spreading rumors without this talent would likely require more work and successful skill checks.

The talent is for that rogue that can go down to the bar, say one thing in passing to the right person hearing it, and a week later it's treated as fact.

It's not for general "spreading rumors" use.


Considering that peopple likes to talk, I say that without Rumormonger ability, you should use mostly same DC, but first success made it only gossip and with failure of 5 or more, character get suspected instead. For being an accepted fact, character has to make 2 another similar gossip without getting caught.
Also, add +5 to DC if rumor is dangerous to its teller.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You've got a lazy GM who didn't have a boiled down mechanic to tell him how to run those events.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Signal boosting the people who have interpreted Rumormonger the same way I do -- as a much, much more powerful effect than it first appears.

Your party's all tricked out with social magic and items, and you want to spread rumors in a city? Great! You should absolutely, 100% be able to do so. Personally, I would run that as a complex series of social encounters -- finding local centers of gossip, gaining the trust of key individuals, knowing the right things to say (or the right spells to use), following up on your efforts over time, and covering your tracks with disguises, threats, and lies so that those rumors can't be traced back to you. All of which involve quite a few rolls of the dice. Think of the expression "lighting a fire under someone." Even with dry tinder, it doesn't just need a spark; it requires carefully placed kindling and fanning of the flames.

What exactly does it take for a rumor to spread? (Disclaimer: as a grad student in communication, this is a topic of particular interest to me.) The dissemination of information within and across social groups is an immensely complex process, not easily reducible to either a matter of well-reasoned argument or charismatic mass appeal. Think about the reasons why politicians launch massive advertising campaigns, or nations dump tons of resources into propaganda: changing people's opinions, or getting them to accept things as fact, is difficult. Even with magic hats and charm spells, it should be involved, time-consuming, and risky.

So why should a rogue spend an advanced talent on Rumormonger, then? Because they can make all this happen with a single check. With a discreet word in the right ear, they can effortlessly influence the hearts and minds of an entire, vast city -- now THAT'S a rogue talent!

That said, if your GM doesn't allow your socially savvy party to try to spread rumors, simply because Rumormonger exists? That's a real shame, and in my view, missing the point of the rules.

Sovereign Court

If you can't spread rumor X (because the GM is being a bit dense), maybe you should try to spread rumor Not-X, and observe how everyone now assumes Not-Not-X to be true.


Ahh, so the solution to rumormonger is to make it as hard as possible on the party so they so they feel like they have to have rumormonger, despite there being no normal rules for spreading rumors beyond it.

But uhh... what if your the player to a GM who says you can't spread it at all without it.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
What would you do?

Throw my dice at the DM until he changes his mind.

Sovereign Court

Ask the GM if the girls in high school spreading nasty rumours about each other are all 10th level rogues, capable of surviving multiple crossbow bolts to the face.

Then point out that Rule 0 tells the GM to change the rules if strict adherence would make no sense.


As a GM I'm always on the look out for ways to use up caster resources. If someone wanted to use spells along with selection of skills I'd suggest all kind of spells to take to make the job easier. It makes the players enjoy using different spells and balances caster to a degree. As well if you go through all this work to start rumor there is risk of it coming back to bite you.

For rogue with this talent I'd allow them to accomplish the same task in a fraction of the time with roll of a dice with no risk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Explain to your DM what an air breathing mermaid is and why it's bad for games.


I know that this is the wrong crowd for this, and will probably get flamed, but, I feel that this could add to the discussion.

4.0 has a mechanic called the skill challenge, which is a series of skill rolls to complete a complex task. If the number of success reach a predetermined number before the number of failures, the whole challenge is a success. The failures just indicate set backs.

The beauty of the mechanic, is that the players indicate what skills, spells etc. they use, the GM sets the DC, the die roll is made, the DM records success or failure, and the game goes on to the next roll, which may or may not be the next action.

I run it a little bit differently, in that I roll the dice for the player, while roleplaying the encounter, or for a great idea, and or great roleplaying, I simply assign the success. on the other had, if the idea sucks, or the roleplaying is dead, then I let the player roll the die, and adjudicate from there.

The mechanic is supposed to be invisible to the players, which is hard to do sometimes, since the players may or may not pick up that a challenge is starting. The point is, this situation would be perfect for this mechanic, and I am going to write it up and use it soon. Thanks for the idea!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The solution isn't to "make it as hard as possible" for the sake of artificially inflating the value of the Rumormonger talent. I'm saying that the act of spreading rumors is inherently complex, and should be treated as such.

You're right, there aren't built-in rules for spreading rumors, which is why I described the way I would interpret and handle the situation (as an in-depth series of encounters with lots of roleplaying opportunity, because I think doing this should be interesting and exciting). But I'm not arguing that players should feel like they have to take Rumormonger -- exactly the opposite! They should feel like their skills and preparations make them fully capable of carrying out this complex mission, and in my opinion, the GM should let them do it. You shouldn't have to have Rumormonger at all, but the talent is powerful because it makes the process a breeze.*

Practically speaking, if you're a player in such a campaign, I suggest talking to the GM about it between sessions. Explain why you believe you should be able to do it -- I hope my points above help make a compelling argument in favor of that -- and propose that the GM either modify the check that the Rumormonger talent allows (if they want a simple solution) or play out the attempt in another way (such as the "social encounters" method I describe). If the GM's not amenable to these solutions, talk to them about the alternative approach of spreading the rumor "the hard way" -- making requests of individual NPCs with Diplomacy to spread the word and convince others to do so. (If your rumor is false, the rogue talent Convincing Lie might help with this approach.) If the GM outright refuses to consider any of these options, consider finding a GM with a more nuanced and understanding approach to playing this game of cooperative storytelling.

*Addendum: I think there's a lot of room for overlap and complexity in here too, depending on what you're trying to do. For instance, if you want to get people talking about how the local barkeep has an unsightly mole in an embarrassing location, well, that should be easy for anyone -- might only require a single check to get that ball rolling. If you're trying to start a violent citywide revolution, on the other hand, that should be difficult and involved even if you do have Rumormonger; a canny rogue might be able to convince people that the duke secretly murdered his brother to usurp the throne, but that doesn't mean they're able to mind-control people into putting themselves in danger.

Basically, the rules can't cover everything, and the GM should interpret or innovate when these gaps occur.

"The rules in this book are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore...Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt."
- The Most Important Rule


aetherwisp wrote:
If your rumor is false, the rogue talent Convincing Lie might help with this approach.

Err, convincing lie is also a terrible rogue talent. It also effectively nerfs bluff. Rumormonger does it by creating rules for rumors where there were none and attaching them to a level 10+ rogue talent, and convincing lie does by attaching a check to someone telling your bluff when there was none before(GM digression may vary, ideally someone telling a lie you told them is telling a truth, or at least what they think is a truth.) Rumormonger also doesn't state who knows who spreads the rumor, so it may not even cover your tracks. It might be that your character ran in flamboyantly and told everyone a great big lie, though that would probably be a little silly. The fact both of them have limitations is insult to injury.

Little off topic, but its something to consider.


Convincing Lie seemed like it could be pretty good actually. I read it as working like the Rogue's lie is suddenly contagious and can affect people who would otherwise just roll their eyes at the person relating his impossible tale as truth at a later date.

Without Convincing Lie:
Random Peasant: Ma' lord, I met the livin' incarnation of the moon on the road today and he's on his way to the castle!
King: Ignorant pleb, begone from my sight!

With Convincing Lie:
Random Peasant: Ma' lord, I met the livin' incarnation of the moon on the road today and he's on his way to the castle!
*a roll is made using the Rogue's +40 to bluff*
King: The moon is coming! Here!? Servants, prepare the best rooms and a feast like that has never been seen before in our realm! We have an important guest!


That's a pretty gullible king. Try this one:

Peasant: My lord, I met the livin' reincarnation of the moon on the raod today and he's on his way to the castle!
*No roll is made because the peasant isn't lying*
King: The moon? *Looks and points out the window to the moon, visible in the sky* Hmmm... Your insane. Guards, throw him into the place we throw the crazy people. *later on a very ridiculous rogue is thrown in jail while a bard charmed the king and became his best friend.*

Peasant: My lord, I met the livin' reincarnation of the moon on the raod today and he's on his way to the castle!
*a roll is made using the Rogue's +40 to bluff*
King: The moon? *Looks and points out the window to the moon, visible in the sky* Hmmm... Your insane. Guards, throw him into the place we throw the crazy people. *later on a very ridiculous rogue is thrown in jail while a bard charmed the king and became his best friend.*

Though I suppose that depends on how you roll with bluff and roleplay your kings.


Piledrive the GM into the Ground! Zangief style!

Seriously, though. If a GM tells me Rumormonger is required in order to spread rumors, I'd probably leave the game. I despise class features that "give" you something by removing that option from everyone else.


Go door to door to every single member of town and bluff each and every single one into believing that it is accepted as fact.

When he refuses point out you did nothing but use bluff as written, using the skill to convince people of a lie.


I'll grant you that Convincing Lie does "create new rules" -- but this is because the rules about telling lies you believe are true are a little vague to begin with (as you point out, this is usually up to GM discretion). Basically, Convincing Lie establishes a new precedent for a particular situation: it suggests (though it still doesn't establish conclusively) that if you convince someone of a falsehood, and they in turn try to convince someone else, they should normally make a Bluff check (perhaps because merely taking your word about something is often different than someone, say, seeing it for themselves).

Example: Sin Silvertongue lies to Joe Guardsman, "I'm the king's new official food taster; you should let me in to inspect his food." Joe's fellow guardsman asks "Say, who was that man? I've never seen him before." Joe replies, "Why, that was the king's new official food taster!"

Does Joe have to make a Bluff check? Pre-Convincing Lie, it was entirely up to GM discretion: you could rule that since Sin successfully convinced Joe of the lie, Joe unshakably believes it's true, and he doesn't have to make any check. Or you could rule that because the Bluff skill says you're convincing someone of a lie, Joe has to make a Bluff check (using his own Bluff modifier) to spread the lie to his fellow.

The rules don't comment on whether belief matters when telling a lie, so they don't conclusively indicate what check, if any, should be made in this situation. In this case, I would probably say Joe does have to make a Bluff check, because all he's got to go on is Sin's word. (A GM might further rule that telling a lie that you believe is true grants you a modifier on the Bluff check, because your earnestness makes it more convincing.)

Convincing Lie suggests that the interpretation "make a Bluff check when repeating lies" is the default. So you're right that this creates "new" rules for that case where the rules were unclear, which could reasonably be construed as a "nerf" to the Bluff skill -- at least, assuming you were previously treating those cases as though people were all immune to Sense Motive when repeating lies.

I don't think this is off topic, incidentally: it's relevant to our understanding of Rumormonger, because I argue that Rumormonger does NOT do the same thing. The difference is that, at least from my perspective, Rumormonger doesn't change the "default" at all: the default for spreading rumors in a city without this talent should often be an involved process -- a "skill challenge," if you will. The advanced rogue talent grants you the new and awesome ability to do that almost effortlessly, but does not change the situation at all for people who don't have it.

Shadow Lodge

aetherwhip pretty much covered it. Without the talent, you'll actually have to roleplay out starting the rumor. I know its horrifying to actually have to roleplay something out instead of just rolling a d20, but sometimes you just have to grimace and engage in the distasteful roleplaying portion of roleplaying games.


MrSin wrote:
That's a pretty gullible king.

An impossible lie is only -20 and sure it says in Bluff that some things may just be too much to work, but we're talking about super high magic worlds; with that in mind let's assume the DM is going with the -20 then. Regardless of how "gullible" the king may or may not be, if the roll is successfully made (including the appropriate penalties) versus the king's sense motive, he bought it.

As far as Charm Person, I think it's overrated. You obviously cast a spell on the king in front of his court... wonder how that's gonna work. Even if you get him behind closed doors he's still only faced with the DC of a level 1 spell. And if you succeed, you only managed to magically date rape drug him for hours per level. I don't think he would be too happy with it when it wears off, but I do admit that if you can get one successfully off you could probably manage to keep it up nearly indefinitely as long as you remain close to him with some planning and the hope that others close to him don't get too suspicious.


chaoseffect wrote:
Regardless of how "gullible" the king may or may not be, if the roll is successfully made (including the appropriate penalties) versus the king's sense motive, he bought it.
Bluff wrote:
Note that some lies are so improbable that it is impossible to convince anyone that they are true (subject to GM discretion).
chaoseffect wrote:
As far as Charm Person, I think it's overrated.

Who said anyone cast charm person? Its all about personality, baby!

The enchantment school though is full of great options for improving your ability to coerce others and actually coercing them. Bard is also the only class who can't silent his spell, though he can also hide his spells in his song from day one of being a bard. How well those spells might work might depend on your GM and how smart you are using them.

Back on topic, if my GM really told me all my magics and skills didn't matter and I just had to have rumormonger to attempt to spread a rumor, I'd probably just find a way to circumvent it and accomplish my goal in another way(preferably using those talents), rather than make a big deal or leave the GM over it. Can't say I'd be happy about his decision, but I think in a lot of cases I'd just find another way. Possibly one more fun.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Without rumormonger, you can spread rumors just fine, but it's going to take some work, just as it would for most folks in real life--surreptitiously dropping hints here and there, finding the right people to convince and convincing each of them, and so on. It could take hours. A talented rogue can do it with an offhand remark.

The best example I can think of for the rumormonger talent:

"Don't you think she looks tired?"


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So, you and your party wants to spread a rumor in a city. The party have high bluff, diplomacy and intimidate. You also have access to several hat of disguises, charm/compulsion and illusions spells, and you plan to use them all to achieve your goal..., but then the DM say "sorry, there is a mechanics for that, and none of you have the rumormonger rogue talent". What would be you do?
Quote:

Rumormonger (Ex): A rogue with this talent can attempt to spread a rumor though a small town or larger settlement by making a Bluff check. She can do so a number of times per week equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 0). The DC is based on the size of the settlement, and it takes a week for the rumor to propagate through the settlement. If the check succeeds, the rumor is practically accepted as fact within the community; succeeding by 5 or more over the DC decreases the time it takes the rumor to propagate by 1d4 days. A failed check means the rumor failed to gain traction, while failing by 5 or more causes the opposite of the rumor or some other competing theory involving the rumor's subject to take hold.

A common misconception is that rumormonger lets you spread rumors. That's not what it does. It let's you spread facts that everyone just believes as true. Without the talent you can spread rumors and many may know that they are just rumors. Or in the case you described, it would be a complicated role playing session where the GM interprets your actions for many different characters. Nothing stops you from trying anyways even if your GM is being a tad obtuse.

Now this is just for the Pathfinder general rules, the actual rules are whatever your GM says they are. Because no one actually plays General Pathfinder, everyone plays their specific pathfinder as ran by their GM. Many games closely resemble the PF general rules, but that is merely because the GM decided that the actual rules should resemble them. So if your GM goes "no rumors without rumormonger" then he is departing from the general rules and there is no arguing with him what the actual rules are by appealing to the general rules, since he makes the actual rules. As player, you get to decide whether or not you want to play that game.


Something else:

Anyone else notice how rumors will change and evolve over time like the game "telephone"?

Yeah with rumormonger you avoid all that. Anyone who feels like that is just "making something hard to inflate the value of a useless rogue talent" may be failing to grasp the nature of rumors.


MrSin wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Regardless of how "gullible" the king may or may not be, if the roll is successfully made (including the appropriate penalties) versus the king's sense motive, he bought it.
Bluff wrote:
Note that some lies are so improbable that it is impossible to convince anyone that they are true (subject to GM discretion).
chaoseffect wrote:
As far as Charm Person, I think it's overrated.

Who said anyone cast charm person? Its all about personality, baby!

Back on topic, if my GM really told me all my magics and skills didn't matter and I just had to have rumormonger to attempt to spread a rumor, I'd probably just find a way to circumvent it and accomplish my goal in another way(preferably using those talents), rather than make a big deal or leave the GM over it. Can't say I'd be happy about his decision, but I think in a lot of cases I'd just find another way. Possibly one more fun.

Charm person seemed implied as the successful class in question was one who had access to first level spells and the word charm was used. As far as the bluff limitation I addressed it; worlds of super high magic would seem to stretch what is truly in the ill defined beyond impossible category of lies defined by bluff. I do dislike the built in ambiguity and the hard limitation of bluff. Think a defined -40 category after impossible would have been better.

That aside I would have a similar response in the needing rumormonger to succeed side of this discussion. "Fine we'll stop trying to roleplay a solution and roll initiative."

Digital Products Assistant

Removed a few posts. This kind of stuff really isn't helpful.


Lemmy wrote:

Piledrive the GM into the Ground! Zangief style!

Seriously, though. If a GM tells me Rumormonger is required in order to spread rumors, I'd probably leave the game. I despise class features that "give" you something by removing that option from everyone else.

*Is now much more tempted to actually require the Talent just to see if you'd actually do it.*


Marthkus wrote:

Something else:

Anyone else notice how rumors will change and evolve over time like the game "telephone"?

Yeah with rumormonger you avoid all that. Anyone who feels like that is just "making something hard to inflate the value of a useless rogue talent" may be failing to grasp the nature of rumors.

Aren't any rules you put on spreading rumors houserules though?


MrSin wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

Something else:

Anyone else notice how rumors will change and evolve over time like the game "telephone"?

Yeah with rumormonger you avoid all that. Anyone who feels like that is just "making something hard to inflate the value of a useless rogue talent" may be failing to grasp the nature of rumors.

Aren't any rules you put on spreading rumors houserules though?

GM roleplaying a town?

Yes the actual rules differ between games in part because the general pathfinder rules for this are non-existent. No rumormonger does not count as having rules for rumors because rumormonger doesn't actually spread rumors.


MrSin wrote:
Aren't any rules you put on spreading rumors houserules though?

No. It's adventure checks and resolutions. Just like making a "bank heist" adventure hook that can involve casing the joint, drugging guards the day before the heist to limit staff, and a series of checks to get past traps, locks and perhaps even leave "evidence" behind to implicate another group.

You aren't making up houserules, you are applying the in-game rules to effect the adventure. There's a wall? Climb skill. You want to lie? Bluff skill.

The DM deciding what is needed to eventually get the end result is simply creating an adventure plot that I could see written out in detail in an Adventure Path. He's just winging it, is all.

And if the high level Rogue has a talent that can bypass all that stuff, then great! That's what high level characters can do. Climbing and travel and whatnot get by-passed by the wizard casting Fly, quite simply. For once a non-caster has something along those lines.


kaisoku wrote:

And if the high level Rogue has a talent that can bypass all that stuff, then great! That's what high level characters can do. Climbing and travel and whatnot get by-passed by the wizard casting Fly, quite simply. For once a non-caster has something along those lines.

Yeah, because waiting a week for a rumor to MAYBE take effect is just like teleporting anywhere in the world five times a day.


Second darkness likely has all the rules needed in the first book. Funny an updated version was never put in the GMG. Anyhow in that book your advertising but all the principles are the same.


For the most part, I agree with aetherwisp.

Ascalaphus wrote:
Ask the GM if the girls in high school spreading nasty rumours about each other are all 10th level rogues, capable of surviving multiple crossbow bolts to the face. . . .

Sounds like empirical test time... *loads crossbow and saunters off*

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / What if the DM ask for rumormonger? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.