|
No I mean by making the actual effort to interact with NPC's instead of just asking for die rolls.You want that diplomacy roll, you want to assist on that roll, you've got to earn it.You mean like by investing resources into Diplomacy instead of some other skill? Or by putting points in CHA instead of more CON? Or by picking a race with a Diplomacy bonus instead of a race with some other neat trick?
Never make someone pay for the same thing twice.
The game is about the characters interacting within Golarion, not a bunch a players sitting around a table. If a person has an issue talking in public (apparently like nosig's wife since he brought it up), then you shouldnt force them into an uncormfortable situation just because that is how you think the game is supposed to be played.
|
|
No I mean by making the actual effort to interact with NPC's instead of just asking for die rolls.You want that diplomacy roll, you want to assist on that roll, you've got to earn it.You mean like by investing resources into Diplomacy instead of some other skill? Or by putting points in CHA instead of more CON? Or by picking a race with a Diplomacy bonus instead of a race with some other neat trick?
Never make someone pay for the same thing twice.
Don't enforce your definition of Role Play on me. I have my own definition, and if I wanted to Role Play your way, I would be in your home game.
I am not. I am at a PFS game, and I am not any form of "role-player", at least not by your definition. I spent ten years with a group that was constantly trying to get me to do more RP. If they didn't succeed, why should you?
Similarly to nosig's wife, I am shy. Very shy. I haven't had a date in over a decade. Yet I manage to GM, usually fairly well. However, as a GM, I don't tend to do funny voices, nor enforce them on my players.
I may, if I am feeling bold, try to do some of what you may call RP, but it may also just be there in an attempt to get that +2 circumstance bonus to my skill check.
But, again, do you make your players climb things, or sneak around, or tumble themselves instead of allowing Climb, Stealth or Acrobatics checks? Do you require some sort of wand activation attempt before you let someone use UMD to try and use a wand?
Seriously, dude, as a PFS GM you are there to enable fun for your players, not to throw unwarranted obstacles in their path. Deafness has its own penalties written into the game. You start throwing extra obstacles, then you are no longer running by RAW, and you have moved into a home game.
Instead, why not run an AP with a stable group of players, where you can make a contract with them as to how the game is played when it doesn't follow RAW? Remember, when you set your self up as a PFS GM, you also set yourself up to run any PFS game by RAW, not your idea of RAI, nor by what you "feel" is right, but by the rules as written.
What are these visual components? Sounds to me that involves a lot of hand and arm gestures. It has to be a performance and strikingly visual, something more than just raising eyebrows.Clearly, you've never seen what I can do with my eyebrows.
I think Jiggy has taken "Prehensile Hair" multiple times.
|
Some people posting above seem unhappy about GMs asking players to elaborate on what they're saying as part of their diplomacy attempt. Bear in mind that some GMs asking for more detail may be doing so because encounters in some scenarios give modifiers depending on what the PC actually says. One scenario in particular can have an important Diplomacy check made vastly easier by mentioning certain information.
(Disclaimer: obviously I wasn't at the tables mentioned in the thread, so I've no idea of the actual circumstances.)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Unless folks are talking past each other, I think we're looking at "I try to convince NPC of X, making sure to mention Y" and making the check, versus the player having to actually say every word and not being allowed the check until they finish their real-life dialogue.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Hopefully resolving some stuff:
We have also made starting and maintaining a bardic performance a bit easier. At 1st level, starting a bardic performance is a standard action, but this changes to a move action at 7th level and a swift action at 13th. Regardless of the action needed to start a performance, maintaining a performance is a free action, meaning that the bard can keep up a performance and still cast spells, move, and make attacks.
Emphasis mine. If having Inspire Courage not interfere with other combat activities is too unrealistic for you, Pathfinder's not the game for you.
|
|
Usually if it's a visual performance it means the bard is dancing or otherwise doing something physicial to "inspire" the other party members. I think it would be hard to dance and still swing a sword and there would be penalities at my table for one who tried to be honest.Sure, but this is the PFS boards, and by RAW nothing supports that. Can I shoot a bow then? Can I cast a spell with somatic components? Would you penalize me when I cast a spell with verbal components while inspiring with verbal components? What if I had the Spellsong feat?
What about if I was tap-dancing? That pretty much only affects my feet, so my arms should be totally free to swing a sword. I could be belly-dancing between deflecting swords and parrying. Just like a lot of things in Pathfinder, its a game with MAGIC and SORCERY. Some things just work.
I have always thought that a Bard dancing in melee just uses his dance as part of combat, which actually inspired a whole archetype and feat (Dervish Dance)! A Bard's MAIN JOB is to use Bardic Performance to the party's benefits. Gimping this ability is pretty much declining the bard of their main class feature.
No need to be nit-picky good grief... as for the tap-dancing, go view of video of someone tap-dancing, they are using their arms to balance themselves, so I would probably say they can't tapdance and fight at the same time (this includes using bows since apparently that needs to be explicit). If they have perform tap-dance, then I would give them a chance to roll their check depending on the circumstances.
and to the one that comment on the penalties I would impose, of course they would be fair and warrented.
I haven't gotten as far as I have in the Gming world of PFS by being unfair and unreasonable so please don't suddenly jump all over me because I said there would be penalties.
goes back to not posting anymore as it's just not worth it
|
I haven't gotten as far as I have in the Gming world of PFS by being unfair and unreasonable so please don't suddenly jump all over me because I said there would be penalties.
goes back to not posting anymore as it's just not worth it
Sorry if it came out that harsh, that was not the intention, and I apologize. Posting on the internet doesn't always convey the right tone/emotion. Like I said a few posts later, I'm just kinda emotional on the bards issue.
Like Jiggy mentioned, I think it's just a 3.0 to 3.5 to PFRPG difference that I think a lot of people are hung up on.
My point was just I would not enjoy playing at a table where those penalties were enforced on my bard. That was all.
|
|
Given that a good deal of diplomacy rides on expressive speech, I have a real problem with you making those checks without an effective voice. Quite frankly I'd insist on a fairly heavy penalty, something at least on the order of -10 to -12 where verbal communication is a factor.
In the case of a deaf mute I'd double the penalties or simply rule it impossible.
That's a pretty severe penalty, especially given the following:
It's supposed to be a severe penalty. Being both Deaf and Mute is not exactly what we call a communication enabler. There are people who come up to the table with Diplomacy modifiers of +14 and up and expect to just have to roll dice. That doesn't fly with me. You want that diplomacy roll, you want to assist on that roll, you've got to earn it.
I'd like you to try convincing a total stranger sometime while your ears are stoppered up and your mouth is gagged. You might argue that this is an unfair test given that you don't know sign. Your average NPC won't know it either.
I certainly hope you don't do the -10 to -12 in PFS. In a home game, do whatever you want. But typical penalties that fall into common sense for RAW are -1 to -5. Not -10 to -12. That basically ensures failure. Diplomacy is more than being able to talk. It certainly includes demeanor, body language, and other things of that nature.
|
|
If an Oracle has the Haunted Curse and there are loose objects around, I generally impose a -2 to -5 penalty... especially in a china shop.
Wasting comes with it's own built in penalties but an area that's suffered a lot of undead attacks may have situaitional penalties on top of that. Anything like Wolfscarred that gives you a freaky or monstrous appearance is going to level at least a -4 from me as well.
If you imposed those on me, I'd be leaving your table and having a word with the event organizer.
If the ability itself does not say that it gives a penalty to a skill (such as the Oracle Wasting Curse), you should NOT be automatically just be imposing penalties on rolls just cause you feel it is justified.
This, and this isn't the only issue I've seen LazarX note that would cause me to leave his table. If I have my character completely neutered because of something he chose to impose that doesn't fit the spirit of the game, I'd be leaving.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Case in point! Who here who doesn't and has never had a deaf or mute player has a legal investment in sign language in PFS.
Nobody, because there isn't a legal sign language in PFS. It doesn't exist. The players would have to communicate through writing, which almost every pathfinder I know has the ability to do, or have the deaf/mute character take read lips, which is her own investment.
The point here is being Deaf already imposes it's own severe restrictions on characters. In order to even partially make up for these restrictions, players need to invest their character resources into other areas. Even then, 90% of the time players won't be able to overcome all of the penalties. This is okay. What is not okay is an arbitrary -10 GM penalty that isn't listed anywhere in the rules because you don't like the concept.
Deaf is a legal curse for Oracles. Vow is Silence is a legal option for Monks. Both are allowed within the Additional Resources, and thus allowed in PFS games. Period. You can't pseudo-outlaw characters by imposing penalties so stiff that any player who has to deal with them would be miserable. That's not in the spirit of PFS, which is inclusive by nature.
Now, since we are talking about RAW here, let me point this out for monks:
The only reason I post this is because Vow of Silence EXPLICITLY STATES that monks with Vow of Silence can communicate with others with Sign Language, so to me that shows that it is legal for Pathfinder play.
|
Now, since we are talking about RAW here, let me point this out for monks:
** spoiler omitted **
The only reason I post this is because Vow of Silence EXPLICITLY STATES that monks with Vow of Silence can communicate with others with Sign Language, so to me that shows that it is legal for Pathfinder play.
Anyone can communicate by sign language, however in order to be understood, it has to be a shared sign language, and of course a legal language. There are no legal languages in pathfinder society which do not require speech, as the only sign language in pathfinder, Drow Sign Language, is not listed in any legal source as a legal language (even if it were, it would likely be a secret language).
There's a difference between being able to communicate by sign language and being proficient in sign language, the first only requires you to have hands, be able to use them, and not be prohibited from doing so, the later requires you to actually know sign language, the problem here is the latter is not legal. Even if there were a legal sign language, it would be much more difficult to use in the middle of combat then a spoken language would.
|
|
Given that a good deal of diplomacy rides on expressive speech, I have a real problem with you making those checks without an effective voice. Quite frankly I'd insist on a fairly heavy penalty, something at least on the order of -10 to -12 where verbal communication is a factor.
In the case of a deaf mute I'd double the penalties or simply rule it impossible.
That's a pretty severe penalty, especially given the following:
It's supposed to be a severe penalty. Being both Deaf and Mute is not exactly what we call a communication enabler. There are people who come up to the table with Diplomacy modifiers of +14 and up and expect to just have to roll dice. That doesn't fly with me. You want that diplomacy roll, you want to assist on that roll, you've got to earn it.
I'd like you to try convincing a total stranger sometime while your ears are stoppered up and your mouth is gagged. You might argue that this is an unfair test given that you don't know sign. Your average NPC won't know it either.
Wow dude! It's called roleplay for a reason. People play the game to do things they can't do IRL. If someone genuinely sucks at public speaking do you expect them to give you a good speech before you make their good roll count?
Deafened characters already have their penalty listed. That's it no need to hinder them further. If chalkboard words with flowers and hearts works on a roll, how is that a bad thing? Wouldn't it be cool if your player looks back at the moment and campaign as one of the best ones he's ever played? Already the character has other penalties such as not being able to communicate in combat, or he'll even communications in other languages will be a hassle, unless they trained in it. Btw communication is 55% Body Language. 33% is tone of voice. Only 7% is verbal. In other words of you don't sound demanding or demeaning, the verbal only affects 7%.
I'd give that chalkboard and flowers player a break.
|
|
Now, since we are talking about RAW here, let me point this out for monks:
** spoiler omitted **
The only reason I post this is because Vow of Silence EXPLICITLY STATES that monks with Vow of Silence can communicate with others with Sign Language, so to me that shows that it is legal for Pathfinder play.
No, because the book isn't written for PFS. There's no mechanics for sign language , whether it's with another language or universal across species. What's happened is that this thing is legal but the secondary powers aren't.
|
I had a player today whose monk took a vow of silence he uses a chalkboard and chalk to communicate it's funny some of the stuff that gets said by the Barbarian at the table when he reads the chalkboard.
The game is supposed to be fun and everyone should feel welcome some just want to roll dice and kill stuff others want to solve puzzles and others rather role play I don't mind who sits at my table I just hope I give them a good game.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the subject of sign language... there is a fluff reference to a 'Pathfinder Sign Language' (I don't recall the exact book atm, it is one of the Pathfinder Society oriented books) BUT it is referenced as a set of pidgin hand signs, more like what military personnel would use to indicate specific concepts... "Stop!" "3 hostiles that way", that kind of thing. Not as a complete language. (However much I wanted it to be, I was convinced through discussions in a few places that it did not, in fact, validate it for PFS.)
As a personal experience with 'Deaf' for Oracles, my character Prism did not do the talking too often by choice, and roleplayed out the impacts on her speech to make sure it was clear. (If GM's applied penalties, I never knew - and would have been perfectly fine if they did.)
Also in the anecdote department, Prism (who was a Heavens Oracle) wasn't actually 'deaf' in character - in the story-space, what was actually happening is she was hearing the heartbeat of Golarion, the starsong of the Sun, the breathing of living things all around her... she heard EVERYTHING in the song of the universe. Can you blame her if she can't filter your one, tiny voice out of that celestial chorus?
|
Venture-Agent, Indiana—Lafayette
|
I regularly play a Zen Archer who worships Zon-Kuthon and has a Vow of Silence. I like to RP it as he removed his own tongue and lips as a sign of faith. Of course, he wears a mask most of the time. But I have never really had any problems at a table with him. I even played him at GenCon and it went smoothly. To top it off, the fist time I sat at a table playing him, I did not speak aloud for 3 hours. Everyone, even the GM, got a kick out of it. I almost made it to the end of the scenario but had to speak up to avoid a bad situation. As for the actual question, in combat I use hand signals to get any messages across, and out of combat I haven't yet found a need to have him speak. Though he will occasionally remove his mask as part of intimidating some mook. As my friendly cleric (of Desna... ick) says, "If he did that to himself, imagine what he would do to you."