Call Truce feat, can this be abused at all?

[VoodistMonk]

So I seen this feat available as a Vigilante Social Talent, and immediately started thinking about silly ways to try abuse it against common bandits and thug encounters in the game.

My question(s) are:

If you call a truce, and combat stops, can you immediately call for initiative to be rolled?

I definitely plan on breaking the truce, but they don't know that. There are lots of ways to boost your Bluff beyond what most NPC's will be able to beat with their Sense Motive checks.

However, you have to put your weapon away to call parley, and there are a couple ways be use Quickdraw as a free action during your roll for initiative...
Put the gun away.
Call truce.
Combat stops.
Can I call for initiative to roll here if none of them best my Bluff with their Sense Motive checks, if they are smart enough to expect a trap?
Because if new initiative is rolled, you can whip out your pistol as a free action, gotcha.

Obviously you can only use this once before the GM puts an immediate end to it, I was just wondering if it was possible in the first place. It is based on skill checks, so if your Diplomacy check beats the DC of the enemy with the highest Charisma, combat stops. They can use their Sense Motive checks against your Bluff DC to see if they recognize it as a trap, but good luck guys.

I think i would be hilarious to use without anyone else in the party knowing it's going to happen, but it would be way better to have them prepared, obviously.

Example:
Some random bandit toll road situation, combat breaks out because the party refuses to pay the toll. The bandits just want a quick coin, more importantly, they want to live to spend their coins. They have no fanatical reason to pursue this fight to the bitter end.

I call a truce. Ace the Diplomacy check, and IF they suspect trickery, say they all fail their Sense Motive checks.

Everyone in your party stops attacking, the bandits stop attacking, combat stops.

Since combat stops, is it a new engagement with new initiative when I break my truce? Because I'm definitely breaking the truce...

[Dave Justus]

Well, the actual series of events is

Put the gun away.
Call Truce.
Opponents get a round to attack you.
Combat Stops if you make your DC 30+ diplomacy check (and there isn't some other reason that makes this check moot).
You violate truce (GM would determine whether or not a new set of initiative rolls is appropriate, I wouldn't think so if it was immediate)
OR
If anyone in the opposite group makes a sense motive check high enough they violate truce.
(GM would determine whether or not a new set of initiative rolls is appropriate, I wouldn't think so if it was less the a few rounds of talking.)
If new initiative GM would determine if there is any chance of surprise (I wouldn't expect so in most cases, both sides are still ready for combat.)

Profit???

[Cavall]

Quick draw doesn't put a gun away. Or any weapon. You may be thinking of gun twirling.

Other than that, "If anyone in your group instead plans to use the parley to gain a combat advantage, the opponents can attempt a Sense Motive check against each such member of your group to get a hunch, with a DC equal to either 20 or the result of that character’s Bluff check, whichever is higher." Seems to be the only thing stopping you.

[VoodistMonk]

This would all be for just silly fun. No real tactical advantage that I can really see.

It's why I said it would be even more funny if no one in the party knew it was a trap. I would be the only one in the party with any motives to sense, they could Sense Motive everyone else and come up with clean intentions. And if I was going to use this trick, I would have an impeccable Bluff that wouldn't be beaten by NPC Sense Motive checks.

Just wondering what sort of shenanigans one can use those Social Talent Influence feats for, and Call Truce was the first one that stood out as something that might be fun.

[Pizza Lord]

If it can be abused, I don't see it being abused in the method you plan to use it for. It seems written to cover most of what you plan.

Also, it's a one round action, meaning you must spend an entire round doing it (though it doesn't appear interrupt-able, so taking damage won't necessarily stop it, so unless you trigger an ability that would draw a weapon or otherwise invalidate it, you could keep doing it.) Then, during any time if an ally attacks or even makes a threatening gesture (which could be casting a healing spell if the other party doesn't recognize it, and even if one does that doesn't apply to all of them) the attempt is wasted.

Assuming the targets can't pass the Sense Motive check and none of your allies screw it up for you, then combat ceases for up to one minute. I read that as basically pausing the combat, but I would say that if combat is paused for at least 1 full round or more, a new initiative order is probably called for, but that's an individual GM's call on each situation.

That's about as much Rules-wise as I can guess, but my call in that situation, even if you tried to quickdraw, I would call for initiative. Just because it's fast (ie. a free action), doesn't mean they don't have a chance to see you preparing to do it and, because I would rule them well aware of what's going on and being watchful (the Call Truce feat makes it clear they are aware of even threatening actions, not just being threatened), they would have a chance to note your drawing the weapon and take action (nothing about the Call Truce says they have their weapons sheathed or not at the ready). I wouldn't allow you to catch them flat-footed either. I would consider this a case where combat has occurred and it's just temporarily suspended, just like you don't become flat-footed just because you spend 3 rounds doing nothing or taking no action (you might move before many of them, but they aren't unaware combatants).

So, yeah, in answer to your question, you could get a new initiative roll, and if you GM lets you, possibly get an action out of breaking the truce (ala a surprise action, not a full round of actions), but there's no guarantee your new initiative rolls are going to be better or worse or more beneficial to yourself or your allies than before. You might actually screw things up for your allies if they're the ones more caught off-guard.

[VoodistMonk]

Abilities like Gunslinger's Initiative and Gunmaster's Initiative allow a gun to be drawn as part of your initiative roll if you have the QuickDraw feat. That's why a new initiative roll is such a big part of this working.

It could still backfire with poor initiative order on the new rolls, if new rolls happened at all.

It's something silly I came across, wondering what the options were besides ending fun combat encounters and making the entire game less intense.

Call Truce. Who would ever do that if not to somehow how gain the upper hand?

The Confabulist and Rhetorical Finish influence feats actually have some use to them out of combat.

But combat is a requirement for Call Truce and it seems that even if you are building a con artist, the feat is still rather useless. If not just an outright detriment to otherwise enjoyable combat encounters.

[Pizza Lord]

It's good for many character types since most Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate type negotion uses require a minute or have sizable penalties. This makes it more likely to be able to coerce, bribe, or otherwise save party resources in situations where combat starts immediately, on sight, or an ambush (ie. almost every combat.)

[VoodistMonk]

Could you then use the Antagonize feat to get them to break the truce? For alignment reasons or role play. Just absolutely messing with battle using diplomacy and bluff skills.

[Pizza Lord]

I don't see why not. I mean, it wouldn't really be them breaking the truce. It would be you breaking it by making a comment so foul that it causes them to fly into a rage (I am assuming you are referring to the Intimidate use, since you mention them attacking.) Anything someone said that caused that kind of reaction is almost guaranteed to be understood by anyone hearing it that you incited it, it's not secret (barring some actual secret you personally know.)

If you used the Diplomacy version (and spent the minute) then he would have a –2 penalty against anyone other than you when/if combat broke out, but I see nothing saying they have to attack.

Either way, if that's your plan, then as a GM I would assume that falls under using Call Truce to gain an advantage, as previously discussed. In the case of using Intimidate, that would break the truce one way or another and then combat would start, but really, it's not such a huge benefit in some cases.

Diplomacy's –2 against targets other than you is nice to help your friends, and Intimidate forcing the guy to attack you instead of your friends on their next action is fine if that's what you need...
but then you're giving them the first attack. Also, from reading Antagonize, it would only work on one target, so not helpful if there's more than one person you are negotiating with.

But, yeah, I don't see why you couldn't do it.