Diplomacy as an alternative play style than murder hoboism question.

[Saurclaus]

My brother gms for my group and we are all family. I would like to not kill everything on site for xp but everyone else wants to play that way and I was told unless I come up with a chart I'm stuck playing their way. I'd like an alternative to that is built into the game but I know next to nothing about pathfinder being a new player and we use roll20 so I don't have all of the game rules like gods and such without buying it. I tried the whole route of just make diplomacy quests but he keeps saying that's not how the game is made. Any advice or pointing me in the right direction would be nice. If all else fails I'll have to quit my group with my family and I don't want that if I can avoid it. It is a home brew.

[Fumarole]

Maybe the Social Combat cards can be of use, either directly or as a source of inspiration. But if the GM doesn't provide opportunities for diplomatic solutions to problems then it sounds like you're out of luck. It sucks, but not all players are compatible with all groups.

[born_of_fire]

XP is awarded for overcoming a challenge. Certainly this means murdering the crap out of that challenge more often than not but it can also mean sneaking past the challenge, talking your way past the challenge, bribing your way past the challenge, tricking someone else to murder the crap out of the challenge, distracting the challenge or any other creative method you can come up with that overcomes the challenge.

None of this means your group is obligated to do anything other than murder the crap out of the challenge, I'm just saying the idea that you have to come up with a chart of some sort is unjustified as the game already accounts for the option you are interested in pursuing.

[Reverse]

What sort of chart are you looking for? All of the Paizo Adventure Paths tend to standardly list XP for talking your way past a challenge as the same XP for killing the foes in combat.

[Pink Dragon]

The rules for diplomacy are on pages 93-94 of the Core Rule Book. There is even two charts on page 94 providing DCs for various things for which diplomacy can be successful.

[ekibus]

I would be careful. Talk to everyone and make sure they are ok with it. I admit I only get to play once in a awhile and I look forward to some murder hoboing...had a person with a ridiculous diplomacy, rolled 40 something (at like level 5) and made the end fight a mute point.. Truly sucked working up to it just to have it end like that. What I'm saying is if people enjoy that style of play...your style of play might kill theirs.Might want to see if there is a party of talkers in your area that have a similar play style.

[Cavall]

I think what the GM is saying isn't that he is adverse to diplomacy, just not in the current group dynamic. At least, not as hes currently willing to run it

Maybe ask for an intrigue game next or a different system. See what you get?

[christian kramer]

Like, are you opposed to how they readily engage in combats or are they killing NPCs out of frustration in navigating the mystery of the story, or even worse... just because they can.

The game is oriented to have a decent amount of combat action and adventure, but it also is supposed to be able to tell a compelling story with character depth. Just because there is magic and creatures and evil in the world, doesn't mean there aren't morale, logical, and legal restrictions. It's why I'm really really careful letting my players pick evil characters as a GM.

My honest opinion is that you're GM probably needs to take a little bit more responsibility in balancing the requests of all his players and start orchestrating realistic consequences for PC actions. Why even play a table-top RPG like pathfinder if you're just going to play it like a video game... just go play a video game.

Some of these consequences might be: (Force the PC's into an excruciatingly difficult combat, where several die, and hammer home the point that there is always a bigger fish, and sometimes a little subtlety goes a long way, cut off a divine caster from their powers for consistently crossing moral boundaries). My very favorite one, was where a Neutral character killed someone in cold blood in public in a city. Even though the victim was indeed evil, nobody knew that, so the authorities arrested him and put him on trial (with the rest of us as his representing attorneys). It was an incredibly fun session... even though he was sentenced to die by hanging, which then led us to finding out a way to fake his death and rescue him.

I would probably share this sentiment with him. Your family should be willing to be flexible with your desires. Sorry I don't have a mechanical solution, I just know that it's always a better playing experience when you keep an open mind, and it seems like your family might just need to hear this.

[Mark Hoover 330]

In a recent game I ran: the party is advancing towards a ruined castle with three entrances to the megadungeons below. As they go they ask "do we see anything in the rubble as we approach?"

Using the surface level Random Encounter chart I'd made I see 2d4 Mites and 1d6 Vermin with a subtable for the vermin; I end up with 6 mites and 2 Giant Centipedes.

The party stops, about 90' from the rubble. Both sides clearly see one another. The PCs are APL 6 and have encountered mites before so they know this is essentially a throw-away combat. Rather than just charge over and murder everything, one of the players asks "can anyone speak their language?"

What followed was an epic Diplomacy check by the Ratfolk Investigator who had their language on his sheet. The PC was aided by a number of spells from the party and the players did a little roleplay to indicate how, non-verbally, they were trying to use their own Diplomacy skills to help. Since they managed good rolls as well I gave the Investigator the benefit of +6 from Aid Another as well.

The result ended up being the PCs taken to meet the leader of the mite tribe; a mite Alchemist 5. More Diplomacy checks were made and earned the PCs 3 hours of an Indifferent attitude. The party and the Alchemist chatted, the PCs got the general lay of the dungeons and since they'd come here specifically seeking an evil cult they were also able to obtain a rough indication where in the dungeon they could find their foes, saving them a great deal of time and trouble.

All of this was made possible by nothing else than simply following the rules in the book along with the patience of my players to USE said rules. First, don't auto-roll initiative and indicate the desire to use Diplomacy. Next, roll to reduce the opponent's initial reaction to Indifferent or better. The GM should roll a d4; this is how many hours the opponent's reaction is adjusted for.

Finally, during this time you may ask questions/requests of your opponent. Continue making Diplomacy checks, the DCs modified by the severity or consequence of the request. If you're asking "which way is true north from here?" the request is fairly simple; if you're requesting the use of the chieftain's own +2 dragon-slaying arrow in an upcoming battle, it's a lot higher on the DC.

Since you've technically "defeated" an opponent, the party receives experience after they move on from the encounter just as surely as they would for killing the monster(s). All you're giving up is the treasure you might've looted from their corpses. If however your PCs are either not in need of said loot, the monster(s)/opponent(s) appear to have little of value or the person(s) you're using the skill on can offer something better in return, then this is just as good a tactic as attacking.

Finally, if you're trying to convince your GM and fellow players to go along with this tactic in some instances, remind them that unless you're using spells/consumables to enhance someone's Diplomacy skill, resolving an encounter this way costs nothing to the PCs. They lose no HP unless Diplomacy fails and combat ensues anyway. Because of this no party resources are spent on healing either. If the party bought a Wand of Cure Light Wounds, gets into a fight with 6 goblins and their 2 goblin dogs at level 2, and takes average damage, chances are you're spending about 2-3 charges of that wand after the battle wraps. Would you rather spend a spell buffing the fighter, take damage on the cleric and fighter in battle, drop another spell from the wizard to stun a couple, and then afterwards spend 45 GP in Cure Light charges... or make a couple Diplomacy checks for the same amount of experience?

[SheepishEidolon]

Saurclaus wrote:

I would like to not kill everything on site for xp but everyone else wants to play that way and I was told unless I come up with a chart I'm stuck playing their way.

Don't be surprised when you do come up with a chart and they still won't change.

There are some compromises possible, actually:

* Convince the opponents that the conflict should be settled by a duel instead of a full battle. Means less bloodshed.

* Involve the fellow players: Let them intimidate the crap out of weak foes, so they flee outright. Ask the GM whether he would award the same XP as for killing.

* Make your diplomatic move, but accept that some opponents won't be cooperative, no matter what you say or how high you roll. This kind of tolerance will make you more bearable for the remaining players.

* Deal significant nonlethal damage or knock foes out with stun / paralysis / sleep / other battlefield control effects. This way they are beaten but not killed. Be ready for fellow players still trying to kill neutralized creatures - make sure the GM awards XP already for neutralization.