Even a cleric of Lamashtu can become trusted, if they save you a number of times with summons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the most difficult things about dming is taking a step back from personal preferences as much as possible and trying to maintain an objective attitude of the enitre multiverse. (which is what the dm controls with the exclusion of the pcs)I can't really do it hence why I'm a horrible dm.
:)
And it can go so easily wrong, a religious dm that pushes the power of clerics and paladins above everyone else, a lawful dm viewing lawful actions as the only examples of good, a bitter dm making all the npcs bitter shits.
What I find a fascinating idea, is for the pcs to somewhat push the caravan around, and choose who comes along.
Now now, no need to get angry, I'm meaning the old dynamic in many rpg games of choosing your party. Because some of the npcs aren't that interesting, and if you want to get to Minkai, there are roles that may need to be filled. E.g. get rid of Shalelu and bring in two hardy northern rangers, specialised in ice and cold navigation. Get rid of the Desnan cleric and get a more interesting cleric in, get rid of the driver and get an illusionist gandalf like driver in. The npcs given, cover some bases, but if the pcs want more or certain backups, I think allowing that is a great idea.
Course, then there is the princess' wishes to consider.
But... that is interfering with the AP. The pcs would be doomed to fail. Evil NEVER triumphs. On top of that, pcs wuld get punished severely for messing with the fates since the dm can't see for sure where this is going......
Evil triumphs when good is dumb.
Which is not the case for the four main NPCs.
They're not people mag, it is okay to joke. You yourself have put forward some criticism of them.
It is not about joking about the NPCs for me, but about the idea of dumbing their existing versions down, so as to make even possible player wishes like "I want to turn Minkai into an evil theocracy, hurpadurp".
If someone wants to re-make the existing character into a, for example, less self-assured, less good version, go ahead. That's totally in the purview of GMs. But saying "no, that's the standard Ameiko" and then not playing her to type seems... wrong.
I don't want to just go in circles, but evil chars can not only be played with intelligence, but their wisdom and charisma can come across as well. New Minkai doesn't have to be built in a day.
So we will use the two Asmodeus clerics as an example. Ameiko needs their help, as the adventure goes along they will help her and protect her from dangers. They become more trusted, maybe even friends Sure their faith is a bit weird, but evil doesn't have to eat the golden goose. As they start to see how it is going, the clerics get the idea. Why don't we go missionary brother, and spread the faith to this foreign land? We can hitch a ride and become high priests, it'll be great.
Now Ameiko and the others could come right down on them, but these evil clerics have already proven their usefulness. It could be similar for cleric barbs of Lamashtu, well they are dark, sure, and worship tainted monsters and gnolls, but they sure do kill our enemies. Or, for Zyphus/Groetus clerics that smile evilly, but dispose of the enemy with powerful and unusual spells. Two clerics can pack quite a punch, and for Ameiko does she try to get rid of the help, because alignments don't match?
There is also the matter that disposing of them is going to lead to casualties, if they say they are not leaving, and there is no paladin amongst the npcs, so why would they be so "crusader" and attack the clerics? I read nothing about Ameiko being anti-Asmodean, and a firm combatant of the evil faiths. She might not like it, there is her alignment, which seems to change across the game as she follows her destiny, but those are the cards that are dealt. The clerics are an opportunity and an obstacle. If two chars are evil clerics, the npcs and the adventure has to deal with that, unless the players are kicked, or their characters are killed.
Now as for converting her, that would take a long time, and you are going to face counters from other npcs. Minkai doesn't have to be turned in a day, and a true manipulator knows that they can get the easy wins first (the people) before they try to take the ruler (the oni, and then Ameiko). The clerics can build their power and followers slowly up over time. Demonstrate the powers they have at their command, get rid of other clerics, play the long game. Lay the ground-work, take it slow.
Sounds like manipulative diabolists to me. As dodgy as it is.
In the AP or any campaign for that matter, there is the default setting of each npc but that can be changed. Evil can be redeemed, good can switch to serving the dark powers. If the pcs decide to make skill cjecks on any npc, they can do so. Depending on the respective results of each skill check, the pc may or may not succeed. Some checks are alot more difficult, that I acknowledge. If the players want to push the adventure beyond the scope of the AP, let them. If they want to finish the AP and then continue on to reshape the nation, step by step to their image, go with it. Characters who do not age like liches and high level transmuters, they aren't sweating the natural cycle of life and death. (new runelord of greed anyone)
We allow conversion and debates in our games, not everyone pushes it though. Social combat and changing an npc is great fun. If someone has an alignment, they accepted a point of view, that can always be changed through dialogue or major events.
Eh, whatever. Sorry, but I don't see Ameiko & friends even wanting to start travel with two clerics of Asmodeus. That's just such an unlikely set-up that it would sour me as a GM on the entire campaign and I would heavily discourage it ( I don't allow evil PCs in my campaigns anyway ).
And I'd treat the four NPCs as PCs in regards to immunity to roll-playing via social skill checks. Roleplay it or leave it.
Not to mention that the local lawful evil religions may have something to say about a newcomer butting it. ^^
Eh, whatever. Sorry, but I don't see Ameiko & friends even wanting to start travel with two clerics of Asmodeus. That's just such an unlikely set-up that it would sour me as a GM on the entire campaign and I would heavily discourage it ( I don't allow evil PCs in my campaigns anyway ).
And I'd treat the four NPCs as PCs in regards to immunity to roll-playing via social skill checks. Roleplay it or leave it.
Really? So you would actualy play the four caravan npcs as totally immune to all social skill checks? So they cannot be bluffed, tricked, seduced, intimidated, persuaded or convinced and made to believe anything via social skill checks?
All this to prevent any pc effect upon them?
Bwahahahahahaha! What a hilarious idea. Machine people, the caravan of golems.
Robin of course sees evil characters could hide their true selves, ingratiate themselves to the larger group, before they work their magic and start the convert train.
I do have a question though.
"Converting her to Asmodeus would mean change her alignment a nearly impossible task".
Why is changing Ameiko's alignment through role-playing, checks and demonstrations of the wisdom of a different path, a near impossible task? She is just a human, humans change their opinions and positions with enough of a push. Unless they are fanatics, and long stuck in their ways (Ameiko is still young, not an old conservative) and she isn't a fanatic, certainly not a Tian fanatic against Asmodeus (that I have read).
Really? So you would actualy play the four caravan npcs as totally immune to all social skill checks? So they cannot be bluffed, tricked, seduced, intimidated, persuaded or convinced and made to believe anything via social skill checks?
All this to prevent any pc effect upon them?
Bwahahahahahaha! What a hilarious idea. Machine people, the caravan of golems.
Yeah, I think treating those four NPCs as if they were players characters ( who are notoriously immune to their group mates skill checks, given how much bad blood that generally generates ) is for me the best approach. If you hate demands on players to actually roleplay that much as you apparently do, maybe that isn't the AP for you?
Why is changing Ameiko's alignment through role-playing, checks and demonstrations of the wisdom of a different path, a near impossible task? She is just a human, humans change their opinions and positions with enough of a push. Unless they are fanatics, and long stuck in their ways (Ameiko is still young, not an old conservative) and she isn't a fanatic, certainly not a Tian fanatic against Asmodeus (that I have read).
Because she has an established personality and, if you would care to read her backstory ( the extended one from the first module ), she would probably be quite resistant to any conversion to evil.
So if they are immune, then the diplomacy section on improving relations with npcs never applies?
See where it starts to run into problems? I love role-playing, but when trying to have an effect out come the dice and mechanics. You want to avoid any roll so that you can say, oh she would never accept that or any change, your argument is unconvincing. Dm control over players being able to try and make some changes.
Personalities change mag, if heroes that keep saving your life and helping you along have a different mindset, and want to teach you there point of view, it would be rude not to at least listen. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Changing her alignment (if you wanted to) would be quite difficult and even impossible depending on how the pcs go about it. Its not like the Asmodeans are going to show their true colors outright by asking her to do something evil. If in the first meeting, they do so, saying something like:"Evening all. We are servants in the service of the prince of darkness. Anyone want to sell their souls or know someone who does? If that was how they role-played the attempts to influence her, I agree its not possible. A more subtle use of words or lies works better. Instead of pressuring her with a dozen skill checks a day, spread it out. Make one or two checks each day, after a few days of that, leave her alone to ponder what you've said for a day or two. Repeat the process. This would be just a sample example of how it could be done. In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Brutus ends up turning on his best friend despite being portrayed as deathly loyal. That could be one way her alignment is changed. Persuaded gradually into doing what is necessary for her beloved people. The needs of the many and all that jazz. So, in a sense, it can eventually become impossible depending on how the pcs role-play it and their respective checks(for something like this I would pay close attention to how they roughly phrased their social checks before looking at the result of the check). However, making it impossible straight from the get-go is a bit odd. Feels a bit like the fates and some greater extraplanar forces are actively protecting her. Come on, she isn't a vow of poverty character with mind shielding. Neither is she an unthinking, unfeeling entity immune to all manner of persuasion. I understand she is a key npc but don't overly favor her just because of that.
So if they are immune, then the diplomacy section on improving relations with npcs never applies?
The relationship rules from the players guide suck. Hard. They take the worst aspects of the newer BioWare games ( stuff the NPCs with presents so that they love you, roll-playing over role-playing ) and give us not the thing in return which makes BioWare NPCs interesting: Character development. I refuse to use them, so they are not a factor in my decisions on how my players an influence the NPCs.
See where it starts to run into problems? I love role-playing, but when trying to have an effect out come the dice and mechanics. You want to avoid any roll so that you can say, oh she would never accept that or any change, your argument is unconvincing. Dm control over players being able to try and make some changes.
Personalities change mag, if heroes that keep saving your life and helping you along have a different mindset, and want to teach you there point of view, it would be rude not to at least listen. :)
If players manage to convince their GM via roleplaying that their argument is compelling, then it is. But GMs should always take into account how their NPCs actually think and treat them like persons, not statistic.
Changing her alignment (if you wanted to) would be quite difficult and even impossible depending on how the pcs go about it. Its not like the Asmodeans are going to show their true colors outright by asking her to do something evil. If in the first meeting, they do so, saying something like:"Evening all. We are servants in the service of the prince of darkness. Anyone want to sell their souls or know someone who does? If that was how they role-played the attempts to influence her, I agree its not possible. A more subtle use of words or lies works better. Instead of pressuring her with a dozen skill checks a day, spread it out. Make one or two checks each day, after a few days of that, leave her alone to ponder what you've said for a day or two. Repeat the process. This would be just a sample example of how it could be done. In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Brutus ends up turning on his best friend despite being portrayed as deathly loyal. That could be one way her alignment is changed. Persuaded gradually into doing what is necessary for her beloved people. The needs of the many and all that jazz. So, in a sense, it can eventually become impossible depending on how the pcs role-play it and their respective checks(for something like this I would pay close attention to how they roughly phrased their social checks before looking at the result of the check). However, making it impossible straight from the get-go is a bit odd. Feels a bit like the fates and some greater extraplanar forces are actively protecting her. Come on, she isn't a vow of poverty character with mind shielding. Neither is she an unthinking, unfeeling entity immune to all manner of persuasion. I understand she is a key npc but don't overly favor her just because of that.
And of course in that example Ameiko never talks with her long-term friends about those new ideas or even with the good-aligned player characters.
That's some "The Emperor just mind-screws Anakin into the dark side, because Anakin is too stupid to talk with his friends" territory.
And why did the emperor mind screw work? Because he was hanging round with the emperor and was easily manipulated.
Good agents accompanying Ameiko don't immediately know what other characters are trying to pull off. They too would have to make checks, listen in, spy and then try to counter what the evil clerics in the example are doing. Which comes down to dialogue, checks, and the possibility of either side winning and altering Ameiko.
I didn't like the player's guide rules either, found it very slow and certain actions like seduction, extremely difficult. What I was more referring to are the basic rules on diplomacy and altering npc attitudes, which your ruling would dispense with. This would of course mean, no check can be made to ever move closer to or get more cooperation from, the npcs. Your check cannot be made, they look at you and see right through your attempt, sort of thing.
"If players manage to convince their GM via roleplaying that their argument is compelling, then it is."
Although real charisma is always an effect on gaming, it isn't about convincing the gm an argument is valid, that is meta-gaming. Stay in character to role-play a character's arguments and attempts, and use the mechanics for determining success. The gms opinions should not matter, the gm should be objective. Is that so hard? If the dice and stats don't matter, if it is only appeasing the gm that matters, saying and doing what they want to get what you want, can you see what you are doing here? If the gm doesn't agree with a social action, it will never succeed. Getting quite tyrannical here mag. If the players succeed at something the gm doesn't like, deal with it and move on. Don't just close whole actions off entirely, with the rolls and how good an acting character actually is at something having no effect at all.
Give the players some space to rp, roll and act!
My objection here was to the cheap plot device that Ameiko gets substantially influenced in what appears to be a vacuum. Two evil NPCs mindscrew with her and she doesn't seems to have the recourse of, y'know, talking with her three friends and the good-aligned PCs about the topic who are about 20 meters away. For months.
What good reason would there be for Ameiko to not go and talk with her long-time friends about the evil-sounding stuff for which those two sinister dudes are constantly trying to take her aside and talk privately to her? Any person with brains would do that.
And plot-induced idiocy for an NPC, here the case that a GM plays the NPCs totally against type just so that his favorite pet players can get their way, is lazy, lazy storytelling.
As for why I think the four main NPCs should be immune to social skills: Because I would treat them as player characters. I don't know if players constantly use their social skills against each other in your campaigns, but in every campaign I've played in or GM'ed, that is considered as rather rude to the other player. It is much preferred to do the necessary roleplaying to her/his face, rather than roll a dice and say "Your character now believes that my character in the past was a mighty king!". I would apply the same principle to the four NPCs. If the players can manage to do convincing enough roleplaying that Ameiko would slowly change her alignment, I would let them do that. I would simply not allow for some dice rolls to pass her the idiot ball, like you seem to want to do.
And why did the emperor mind screw work? Because he was hanging round with the emperor and was easily manipulated.
Especially the latter. Do not forget that Anakin was young, socially inexperienced, and frustrated, and was under the constant strain of having to keep an illicit relationship from everyone. Ameiko has, by her backstory, quite a bit more experience and social skill.
Good agents accompanying Ameiko don't immediately know what other characters are trying to pull off. They too would have to make checks, listen in, spy and then try to counter what the evil clerics in the example are doing. Which comes down to dialogue, checks, and the possibility of either side winning and altering Ameiko.
Unless the PCs are routinely separated, it's not that hard to overhear stuff happening in a small camp. If two people routinely want to try to "hog" Ameiko, everyone else - who include several close friends of hers - should in knowing what's going on. They would probably not pry too much if Ameiko and one of the two are an item, though you never know who may have voyeuristic tendencies. That is imo natural in a small, closely-knit group such as the caravan is by default.
And if Ameiko is being presented with such important choices, it would be natural for her to discuss it with everyone else. They are friends, they are around her all the time, and she trusts them a lot. She's not some shy wallflower just coming into social interactions, for Cthulhu's sake.
Yes, it is possible to change an NPC, although considering the scope of the change and all other PCs and NPCs around, I think it would be exceedingly hard. The players imo have much bigger chances to position themselves in a situation where they can accomplish their goal in the long term (i.e. becoming province governors in Minkai or advisors in Ameiko's court) than causing a radical shift in her personality over the trip. Heck, they may have an easier time ensuring she is "offed", though that has its own brand of serious problems.
True, certainly. However, if the cannot make any social changes to Ameiko or the others, then they have complain that isn't much opportunity for rp and effect over the story.
This is my main concern on this issue.
They'd have to convince all the NPCs or quietly murder the others when the opportunity arises. Yeah, the set-up makes it not easy for evil characters to shine in their evilness. I am pretty sure that this is by design.
Actually, not quite. If the good npcs want to stop the evil clerics from exerting an influence over time, then they have to be killed. Once they are in and absolutely committed and eager to help/friends with Ameiko, getting rid of the clerics will be a problem for the npcs.
Also, I know you want to avoid the actual stats coming into play, how persuasive the clerics could actually be, but if they level faster than the npcs and get a lot more done, their checks for persuasion and manipulation will increase faster than the npcs guarding the wagon. So the old Desnan cleric competes with the younger Asmodeus cleric, and risks badly losing arguments and debates against the honey-tongued new upstart.
An evil barbarian determined to protect Ameiko (perhaps for selfish ends) and hoard oni skulls could easily work with the adventure. So don't be too quick to say evil characters couldn't shine. The evil Ulfen barb-rogue viking raider I saw in a paizo npc guide somewhere would absolutely work. Bring on the snow.
An evil invoker pleased to test his spells on foreigners and oni, also could become the most reliable of glass cannons.
And clerics, mmm clerics. A lot of perils out there, lot of damage and drain, who you gonna call? Evil cleric!
We already got good Cleric with Koya. ^^
My view of "the four main NPCs should be treated as PCs in regards to social rolls" is of course just my personal interpretation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm reminded of a campaign I ran, where the party successfully convinced a CE wererat into sheathing his weapons and coming wth them. It was a combined effort between the high charisma party warmage and another npc who proceeded to be diplomats. So the warmage role-plays the diplomacy check, tells me roughly what is said AND how does she start the diplomacy check. Npc throws in an assist. The result and description of the check was good enough to convince the wererat to calm down. Granted, I really liked the wererat villain-to-be. However, the rules and mechanics are there. Certain characters like pallys and devout blackguards are very difficult to convince but not impossible. If I had made the wererat "immune to roll-playing via social skill checks", that sort of outcome would not be possible. It would go straight to initiative and then its just another bloodbath. Chance to gain xp = high. Chance to roleplay = non-existent. In the above example, xp and role-playing were both there. I personally prefer that but I know some players who care mainly for the xp and loot but very little else.
Well, I hold my players to the standard of roleplaying and they are capable of it.
And I don't use the "immune to social rolls" thing on every NPC, of course, but this is a rather special case, given how the PCs will be traveling with them all this time.
"Chance to gain xp = high. Chance to roleplay = non-existent."
Well put!
You would only be able to kill, or be killed. Not exert real change in the situation itself.
We brought the wererat on-side, gave him a government position "mayor of the under-city", reconciled the lycanthropes with the city they were about to attack and the wererat became a part-time bodyguard of the warmage. There is a huge amount that can be done socially if a dm will only let players make the rolls and respond accordingly. I look forward to playing through jade regent with this in mind *looks at equalizer expectantly*.
Well, I hold my players to the standard of roleplaying and they are capable of it.
And I don't use the "immune to social rolls" thing on every NPC, of course, but this is a rather special case, given how the PCs will be traveling with them all this time.
It is a poor choice, especially moreso since it isn't just for one npc, but a group of npcs that accompany the pcs for such an extended period. You don't want any change, but allowing and responding to change is a part of what being a dm is.
So just so I am clear, what are you going to do if the players want to make a dip check, bluff or intimidate? The npcs are fearless and totally unaffected by social rolls? They will not respond favourably or negatively to any check, because the check mechanic is removed for them? Control issues mag?
I participated in a runelords game run by a dm. What made the game horrible was precisely this sort of thing. Every npc was seemingly immune to social checks. Try intimidate? Everyone seems to be a paladin immune to fear. Try diplomacy? Everyone is a courtier and demands a check of 25-30. Try bluff? Everyone also is a part time monk/cleric with 18 wisdom and max ranks in sense motive. This happened almost all the time but especially when a pc was trying to pull something dodgy. I noticed it. Couple it with the fact that every supposedly key npc was equally bland and distant, you have the perfect formula for a horrible game. Horrible it was. Instead of being called hemlock or zantus, they could all have been constructs of each other labelled T101- T1000 and it wouldn't have mattered. That was how uncool it was. Everyone has to tow the line. The goodly extra-planar powers are watching specifically over this group of adventurers. Ready to spring on them and shout:"Gotcha!"
I think at the 4-6 books of the adventure the NPCs are pretty much background flavor at that point with the exception of Ameiko who appears when appropriate. Not that this changes any of the issues with diplomacy rolls and such but the PCs are going to do the heavy lifting and so should be the ones dealing with other NPCs. I would be surprised if anyone other than Ameiko even get mentained.
Yep, also npcs who are fine when they are brought to 0 hp. Not a fan of protectionism of npcs.
Back to the topic, there is another problem with Jade regent npcs being immune to checks. Ameiko is a rake, which is sort of a duellist that has the power of swagger and can make intimidate checks instead of sneak attack damage. So let us say a swashbuckler or rogue spars with her over the journey. Test skills, make feints, find openings, have a good time (perhaps make some seduction checks as well, eyyyy?). Now this isn't to the death, this is just a friendly match. By your rules mag, her opponent if they tried a feint would discover she is immune to feint (since she is immune to bluff). They can spar as much as they want, but the dex fighter, or rogue, or swashbuckler or ranger, will never be able to feint Ameiko and show off this side of their skill, because she is immune to bluff and feint. Seduction is also right out. The ice queen cannot be moved. :(
Another one, the pcs are arguing over how to proceed, can't agree, and wish to persuade Ameiko through argument that their plan is superior to the other pcs plan. None can succeed, since she is immune to diplomacy and can't be persuaded via checks. If it is only by rp that she can be swayed, then it doesn't matter how good a char is at diplomacy, whether it is their focus or not, or how well they roll, the player with the better charisma mod in real life is the one that sways her. So you see, making npcs strange bots makes the game very meta, and shuts down rp opportunities. It is a bad idea mag!
Well, I hold my players to the standard of roleplaying and they are capable of it.
And I don't use the "immune to social rolls" thing on every NPC, of course, but this is a rather special case, given how the PCs will be traveling with them all this time.
It is a poor choice, especially moreso since it isn't just for one npc, but a group of npcs that accompany the pcs for such an extended period. You don't want any change, but allowing and responding to change is a part of what being a dm is.
So just so I am clear, what are you going to do if the players want to make a dip check, bluff or intimidate? The npcs are fearless and totally unaffected by social rolls? They will not respond favourably or negatively to any check, because the check mechanic is removed for them? Control issues mag?
I will tell them: "Roleplay it" and that's what they will do. Makes the game better than rollplaying it. You should try it sometime, you seem to think that Pathfinder is mostly using your leet skill bonuses to forego actually playing the game as intended.
See, I can make ad hominems just as good as you do.
I participated in a runelords game run by a dm. What made the game horrible was precisely this sort of thing. Every npc was seemingly immune to social checks. Try intimidate? Everyone seems to be a paladin immune to fear. Try diplomacy? Everyone is a courtier and demands a check of 25-30. Try bluff? Everyone also is a part time monk/cleric with 18 wisdom and max ranks in sense motive. This happened almost all the time but especially when a pc was trying to pull something dodgy. I noticed it. Couple it with the fact that every supposedly key npc was equally bland and distant, you have the perfect formula for a horrible game. Horrible it was. Instead of being called hemlock or zantus, they could all have been constructs of each other labelled T101- T1000 and it wouldn't have mattered. That was how uncool it was. Everyone has to tow the line. The goodly extra-planar powers are watching specifically over this group of adventurers. Ready to spring on them and shout:"Gotcha!"
Yeah, because my post from just above does not exist, where I said that I make a special case for those four NPCs, because I treat them as PCs. If you want to read right over that, be my guest, just don't expect me to take you seriously.
Rolling and roleplaying can be combined. Isn't it a wonderful game that we have?
You want to avoid the rules so you can shut down the possibilities. They can't succeed unless you say so.
Tell me plain then, would you make Ameiko immune to feint as well since that involves a bluff check?
Take away the game mechanics, you are going to have a bad time.
Combat uses of social skills are of course a different matter, I would not castrate combat feats because of a roleplaying system I prefer.
And actions always only succeed because the GM allows them, otherwise you could have diplomancers shut down the main villain of a campaign with one roll.
Please spare us the embarassing "Then I would romance her during combat hurpadurpadurp" comment which would surely come now from you.
So you are saying, you wouldn't even allow the villain to pause and listen, even if the diplomat took the appropriate penalties and tried to end the conflict peacefully?
Urrrgh.
Lot of anger mag, we are just talking about a system, rules and an adventure path, calm down man, learn from chill penguin.
http://www.dorkly.com/video/22324/dorkly-bits-chill-penguin-is-chill
You might want to not sprinkle your arguments so much with ad hominems if you want a calm discussion.
And, no, I would of course not allow a final confrontation in the campaign be solved via a twinked out skill. Not that my players would actually try something like that, thankfully.
So... the villain is immune to diplomacy now too?
This has become hilarious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you say so.
"Hey, maaaaan, Tar-Baphon, we totally should be friends and you should just chill out, maaaaan."
"Well, if your skill check says so..."
Party comes to an agreement, he really twisted their arm, but well jeez he just makes such a compelling case, from such a wise and noble leader. They will work with Tar-baphon, we can all be friends! They then kill him when his guard is down, and have gathered the intel to know where his phylactery is. Done. The hidden blade is the most dangerous.
Allow more options, even usual social options, and you can get some great intrigue. The players can add thinking and plotting to their killing of the big bad (this coming from a rogue and ninja fanboy).
Uh-huh.
Out of hp?
Or trying to make yourself immune to social checks?
:O
I'm not seeing how continueing this conversation will lead to anywhere constructive.
I'm sure we could think of something. I've got one, is Ameiko really NG and if so, why?
I'm sure we could think of something. I've got one, is Ameiko really NG and if so, why?
I think Ameiko has calmed down considerably after her rebelious youth. She's more mature and has come to understand that sometimes some order and discipline is necessary to keep the peace.