What is with the flat DCs on Diplomacy. I mean, now they add some modifiers to them, but they are still flat.
Check out Rich Berlew's Diplomacy overhaul. That's what is needed, with permission, of course.
http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jFppYwv7OUkegKhONNF.html
One problem with using that rule in PRPG, I think, is the size. That rule is more than double the size of the current rule. It would eat up a decent amount of space.
One of the reasons the diplomacy skill is so simple and undeveloped is that there are basically 2 ends of the spectrum. If you don't want to roleplay the encounter then make the roll and move on with the story with the DM telling you what the NPC does. On the other end, leave the diplomacy check off the table and do the entire encounter as a roleplaying experience.
I personally like the latter, and in a few rare instances I make them roll and just come up with a reaction based on their roll modified by how I felt they did roleplaying and coercing the character.
Complicated rules for something that is either used, or not used at all will make these scenes even more complicated. When the diplomacy skill is used, its used and the game moves on.
Personally, I think the only reason diplomacy is even a skill in D&D is to help DMs who don't want to prolong simple encounters. Why roleplay an hour about an orc salesman when you just wanted him to sell an item and move the PCs on. Roll, narrate, progress.
Brit O wrote: One of the reasons the diplomacy skill is so simple and undeveloped is that there are basically 2 ends of the spectrum. If you don't want to roleplay the encounter then make the roll and move on with the story with the DM telling you what the NPC does. On the other end, leave the diplomacy check off the table and do the entire encounter as a roleplaying experience.
I personally like the latter, and in a few rare instances I make them roll and just come up with a reaction based on their roll modified by how I felt they did roleplaying and coercing the character.
I lean more towards the middle. I've DMed a wide variety of people, from fantastic role-players to individuals who really-really want to play but just aren't that great. I find value in rewarding spectacular role-play, but I also find value in making sure those people who aren't that good have fun in their experience and get to play the character they want. Nothing's more of a blow to an inexperienced gamer than having this great idea of playing Douglas the Bard but he can barely carry a tune, couldn't recite poetry for anything, and is a complete "lives in basement type" for diplomacy encounters and I as a DM enforce his personal issues on his character.
Going for pure roles harms the good role-players and in some ways can diminish the role-play experience, but conversely, going for a pure role-play experience limits those who aren't as good into the role of the fighter, barbarian, or somebody with virtually no social skills. I know people that are terrible at lies, but want to lie in game, and frankly I'm not going to punish them for it. What I do is reward good roleplay with situational bonuses to their checks, but continue to use the base checks. Good roleplay also nets small XP rewards, which also gives everybody incentive to improve and try to roleplay, but doesn't make it an issue for those who are reaching beyond their comfort zone.
I think that flat Diplomacy DCs would be a problem...except for the fact that I doubt that anyone uses the Diplomacy system as-is anyway.
In my experience, the DM just sets some arbitrary Diplomacy DCs and says: "If the players can make a DC of X, this guy will do Y for them" where X is an appropriately high number.
I don't think there are many DMs out there who really say: "Well, my hands are tied -- you made the DC 50 Diplomacy check so your old arch-enemy is now your best buddy forever. The end."
Rich Burlew's system is just as bad in its own way. He sets a +10 DC modifier for exchanging a castle for a piece of string, for Pete's sake!
hogarth wrote: Rich Burlew's system is just as bad in its own way. He sets a +10 DC modifier for exchanging a castle for a piece of string, for Pete's sake! On his forums he made a comment saying that was a bit of a joke and he didn't seriously mean that you could get a castle for a piece of string.
Zynete wrote: hogarth wrote: Rich Burlew's system is just as bad in its own way. He sets a +10 DC modifier for exchanging a castle for a piece of string, for Pete's sake! On his forums he made a comment saying that was a bit of a joke and he didn't seriously mean that you could get a castle for a piece of string. Well, that's sort of my point. There's a whole bunch of Diplomacy rules (3.5, Pathfinder, Rich Burlew's, whatever), but when it comes right down to it, nobody seriously thinks that you can get Demogorgon to commit suicide (say) just by making a really high Diplomacy check.
At any rate, with Rich Burlew's system getting your 20th level (base DC 35) archenemy (+10) with 18 Wisdom (+4) to accept a horrible bargain (+10) is a DC 59 Diplomacy check. That's well within the realm of possibility when you consider there are abilities that give you +20 on skill checks!
hogarth wrote: Zynete wrote: hogarth wrote: Rich Burlew's system is just as bad in its own way. He sets a +10 DC modifier for exchanging a castle for a piece of string, for Pete's sake! On his forums he made a comment saying that was a bit of a joke and he didn't seriously mean that you could get a castle for a piece of string. Well, that's sort of my point. There's a whole bunch of Diplomacy rules (3.5, Pathfinder, Rich Burlew's, whatever), but when it comes right down to it, nobody seriously thinks that you can get Demogorgon to commit suicide (say) just by making a really high Diplomacy check.
At any rate, with Rich Burlew's system getting your 20th level (base DC 35) archenemy (+10) with 18 Wisdom (+4) to accept a horrible bargain (+10) is a DC 59 Diplomacy check. That's well within the realm of possibility when you consider there are abilities that give you +20 on skill checks! Ok, so I am also a DM who prefers the middle ground. I find it fun to have diplomatic discussions, but I don't want to penalize a character for the player's personality, or the DM (think about the difference between the omnipotent DM talking and the orc merchant - I know you have more money than that....I mean, I see your pouch is quite large). I also don't like the fact that a "diplomacy" argument (someone trying to get their way) can last 10-20 minutes if the DM can't end it with a very clear roll. Players also get upset when they "lose" a roll after the argument because they think the DM just made up a DC which was impossible. I love roleplaying, but it gets a little too intense in the meta-game.
I guess the biggest thing that I want is an opposed check (or roll of 10 depending on enemy). I know it's more rolling, but at least it's not totally arbitrary. I agree that the +/-10 cap is a little arbitrary, and even though a 59 is doable, it's only doable by those who have devoted their lives to talking people into doing/not doing things. I mean, I'm sure there are people out there that can convince someone who they consider their arch-enemy to commit suicide.
I think I would also prefer some of the "talking" items to be combined or adjusted. There's nothing quite as diminishing as having a tense discussion, then I have to ask (out of game context) "Is that a bluff?" Sometimes you haven't decided if you are going to uphold your end of the bargain when you are making the negotiations. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this one, but it's something to think about, not a suggested change.
The other stupid meta-gaming that happens is "if the DM rolls for you, it's Bluff vs. Sense Motive, otherwise it's Diplomacy".
I don't mind continuing to house-rule it, but I figure if almost everyone does a house-rule, they could at least get something that newbie DMs could use effectively. Anything that's not a flat DC would make me happy. Maybe Rich's 20th level archenemy could be compelled to do something horrible with a 59, but right now all you need is a 25 (according to the rules). I've known plenty of players that would get bent out of shape if you didn't let them do at least something pretty awesome with a measly 25 roll.
I guess that's my rant.
Chris Brown 66 wrote: What is with the flat DCs on Diplomacy. I mean, now they add some modifiers to them, but they are still flat.
Check out Rich Berlew's Diplomacy overhaul. That's what is needed, with permission, of course.
http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jFppYwv7OUkegKhONNF.html
How about this wording?
Diplomacy (Page 56):
Diplomacy is an opposed check: characters use 1/2 character level (or CR when applicable) + CHA bonus on this check, or 1d20 plus their skill modifier, whichever is higher.
Diplomacy allows the following effects/maneuvers:
(a) Stop Combat - (-10 penalty to use as a full-round rushed action): successfully beating the enemy on this skill allows the speaker to temporarily convince both sides of a combat to stand down, allowing use of Improve Demeanor to calm tensions further. Enemies in rage get +5 on this check for heightened fighting emotion. Retry: at -5 for each successive attempt.
(b) Improve Demeanor - A success on this check moves the target's demeanor one step up. For every 5 points beyond success, improve the target's demeanor one more step. Retry: -10 cumulative for each attempt. Use this for talking people into doing things for the PC's (if they can achieve "helpful"), and apply circumstance bonuses (GM's discretion) for bribery and good roleplaying. Possibly offer a +2 circumstance or synergy bonus if PC's have 5 ranks in the applicable Knowledge:Local skill.
(c) Haggle - Use to increase reward for a mission, improve prices on selling/buying goods, or other monetary transactions. Roll opposed check, adjust monetary amount by 1% for each point of success in either direction (Examples: PC wins by 12 points, reduce price on new suit of armor by 12%; PC loses by 6 points to canny merchant or used wagon salesman, raise prices 6%). Apply circumstance bonus (+/-2 per level?) for each attitude above or below "neutral."
Recent threads in Skills & Feats
|
