Does it? For example: "Please don't kill us mama bear. We're not here to hurt your cubs."
|
It's going to come down to the GM. A few will let you make a diplomacy check if the bear isn't actively about to attack you. Most will look at the diplomacy rules and say "no." Here's the relevant bit:
...You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less...
Animals are almost always Int 2 or lower. So even if it understands you it doesn't meet the second criteria. But if the circumstances make it fun and clever to allow you to use Diplomacy, I might allow it anyway.
Probably not...
Just because you can speak their language does not gift them the ability to understand the concepts you speak of.
Some alien shows up and explains quantum physics to a child... in the child's language... does the child suddenly understand quantum physics simply because they understand the language the alien uses to talk?
Yes, by RAW it does allow you to make Diplomacy checks, but Handle Animal does not. You can use Diplomacy against a creature that understands you (such as via Speak with Animals) or if the animal has an Intelligence of 4 or higher. So, to influence the attitude of a creature, this is either a Wild Empathy check or Diplomacy check provided certain conditions.
Influence Attitude
You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature’s starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier.
Succeed– If you succeed, the character’s attitude toward you is improved by one step. For every 5 by which your check result exceeds the DC, the character’s attitude toward you increases by one additional step. A creature’s attitude cannot be shifted more than two steps up in this way, although the GM can override this rule in some situations.
Fail– If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character’s attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character’s attitude toward you is decreased by one step.
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less. Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future. Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion).
Retry? You cannot use Diplomacy to influence a given creature’s attitude more than once in a 24 hour period. If a request is refused, the result does not change with additional checks, although other requests might be made.
Starting Attitude Diplomacy DC
Hostile 25+ creature’s Cha Modifier
Unfriendly 20+ creature’s Cha Modifier
Indifferent 15+ creature’s Cha Modifier
Friendly 10+ creature’s Cha Modifier
Helpful 0+ creature’s Cha Modifier
As far as winning a Diplomacy check vs. Mama Bear, she is easily starting off as Hostile attitude (or "impossible to influence" due to "intend to harm you and your allies in the immediate future"), and the DC is not easy to defeat, but you can certainly try.
I used to think something along these lines about the stupid HEART ring from Captain Planet.
Stupid kids are stuck in a stupid pit with some stupid tigers... "Heart!"...
Moron, they're hungry, not upset. They will calmly eat you now, good job.
Hey, Heart was the best ring. He just never used it right.
"Bwahaha, I will dump all this oil into the ocean, because I hate fish or whatever!"
"HEART!"
"...I feel bad. I should stop. And maybe throw myself in the ocean."
Show over. Done. All conflicts resolved.
I think Speak With Animals ought to give you the same benefit in terms of communicating with critters that raising your companion's Int to 3 does-- you should be able to convey more complex and specific information..using Handle Animal or Wild Empathy. And I mean, hey, how about a bonus to the roll? Especially for basic stuff.
"Hey, bird. Did some orcs come through these woods?"
"Yeah."
"I'll give you some berries if you show me where they went."
"...'kay, follow me."
I've had players try to turn horses into guards and dolphins into dive recovery teams. I don't think that sort of thing is very likely without a pretty big v bonus on that Wild Empathy. But minor stuff, especially just basic information? Why not? What reason does that squirrel have to withhold intel?
The spell states that the spell doesn't make them any more friendly but that you can ask questions and receive answers. So you can't use it to change attitudes but you can to gather information.
That said, most animals aren't immediately hostile. Predators are either defending territory or after a meal and herbivores are defending themselves or their herd. I would allow Speak with Animals to reinforce that you are not a threat / too dangerous to attack for food. That would be treated as a circumstance bonus to other actions that might change the animal's demeanour.
Respectfully RK, I read the RAW on Diplomacy as "you cannot use Diplomacy on a creature that does not understand OR has an Int of 3 or less" to mean if the creature now understands you (Speak with Animals spell running), BUT the creature still has an Int of 3 or less... you can't use Diplomacy.
Meanwhile to adjust an animal's starting attitude, that's the whole point of Wild Empathy. In the ability it states
A druid can improve the attitude of an animal. This ability functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person. The druid rolls 1d20 and adds her druid level and her Charisma modifier to determine the wild empathy check result.This plus the Int requirement clause in the Diplomacy skill always suggested to me that you CAN'T actually influence the attitude of an animal unless you possess Wild Empathy, or cast Calm Animals or whatever. If this has already been litigated somewhere on these forums and I missed it, I apologize.
I can see how it could be read that way. Personally, I read it as "if a creature has 4 Int or higher, then you can use Diplomacy to influence their attitude" and "if a creature has 3 Int or less, then it must be able to understand you somehow". I would even allow a PC to attempt an Interpretive Dance, but only as long as they performed said Interpretive Dance IRL for the group, with a possible +2 bonus if the dance is in any way sexually provocative, maybe even a +4 bonus if they also sing or hum "My Humps" from the Black Eyed Peas.
I would say Wild Empathy has neither of the above requirements and can be used in any circumstance (sans "impossible to influence").
|
|
Influence Attitude
. . .You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less. Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future. Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion)...
My grandfather is a terrible driver. We finally had to lay down some rules for him.
You cannot Drive the Car when it is raining or it is nighttime.
Is he allowed to Drive the Car if it is not raining (but it is after dark)?
I read that as providing two conditions that each, independently, restrict your grandpa's permission to drive. If either condition is met, he cannot drive.
A. If it is raining, he cannot drive.
B. If it is nighttime, he cannot drive.
So, looking back to the OP;
If the target cannot understand you, you cannot use Diplomacy.
If the target has an Intelligence of 2 or less, you cannot use Diplomacy.
If either condition is met, you cannot use Diplomacy...
Influence Attitude
. . .You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less. Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future. Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion)...My grandfather is a terrible driver. We finally had to lay down some rules for him.
You cannot Drive the Car when it is raining or it is nighttime.Is he allowed to Drive the Car if it is not raining (but it is after dark)?
If you read it as "the target creature must have a 4 Int or higher AND must be able to understand you" then I get it. You're reading it as "Either Or or Both" and I'm reading it as "Either Or". It can also be read as "Both".
There are two "Or's" in this sentence. The difference between these three is:
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you OR has an Intelligence of 3 OR less. (inclusive, Both)
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you OR if it has an Intelligence of 3 OR if it is less. (non-inclusive, Either Or)
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you OR if it also has an Intelligence of 3 OR if it also is less. (inclusive & non-inclusive, Either Or or Both)
But let's ponder the application of this IRL and in Fantasy. If a creature has 2 or 3 intelligence, and you're having a conversation with it via Speak with Animals, I don't see any reason why you couldn't improve it's attitude from Indifferent to Friendly. People can improve a creature's attitude from Indifferent to Friendly even without the Speak with Animals spell IRL. Have you ever seen people get bears, raccoons, birds, deer, and other "wild" animals to eat from their palms and even hang out with them in their yard or on the porch? I have. You can even go on YouTube and look up the Hummingbird girl or the Russian guy who wrestles with bears. I mean, where did domesticated animals come from? Someone at some point had to make a Diplomacy check IRL.
It's not so far fetched to think that if you were using a Speak with Animals spell IRL that this process wouldn't be even easier. In a Fantasy setting, if you can Speak with Animals, you're basically Cinderella or any other Disney Princess.
|
|
I see what's happening, Ryze. When you read that clause you are inverting the rule to Permissive instead of Prohibited language. "Can" instead of "cannot." But you aren't completely inverting it.
Thought exercise:
Invert the following sentence to use "cannot" instead of "can."
You can use Diplomacy against a creature that understands you or has an Intelligence of 4 or more.
Given that, what's the inversion of the actual clause?
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less.
You can use Diplomacy against a creature that understands you AND has an Intelligence of 4 or more.
The opposite of an "inclusive Or" is not "And", but rather it's a "non-inclusive Or". "Inclusive Or" is the same as "And" because it means "Both"
There is a double negative in this sentence and an inclusive Or, so let's invert the 3 clauses and change the "Inclusive Or" to "non-inclusive Or".
"You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less 4 or higher.
With the clauses inverted as to get rid of the double negative, and now with a non-inclusive Or, it becomes:
"You can use Diplomacy against a creature that does understand you or has an Intelligence of 4 or higher."
If we're to consider the "reality" of a fantasy setting game, suggesting that "You can only use Diplomacy against a creature that does understand you AND has an Intelligence of 4 or higher" suggests that Diplomacy checks are impossible under any circumstance vs. creatures with 3 Intelligence or lower without the aid of a Druid with Wild Empathy.
And if that is the case, then how did any animal with an Intelligence of 3 or lower, such as chickens, cattle, goats, etc., become domesticated in Fantasyland if it is impossible to make Diplomacy checks against them?
I don't believe that the only way to make Diplomacy checks against these animals is with a Druid.
And if that is the case, then how did any animal with an Intelligence of 3 or lower, such as chickens, cattle, goats, etc., become domesticated in Fantasyland if it is impossible to make Diplomacy checks against them?Uh, Ryze, you do know Handle Animal exists, right?
Yes, but you cannot make Handle Animal checks to approach and befriend a wild animal. People approach and befriend wild animals IRL, and if you cast a spell called Speak With Animals, you're making this process infinitely easier, but you're still not making Handle Animal checks. You're making Diplomacy checks.
|
Yes, but you cannot make Handle Animal checks to approach and befriend a wild animal. People approach and befriend wild animals IRL, and if you cast a spell called Speak With Animals, you're making this process infinitely easier, but you're still not making Handle Animal checks. You're making Diplomacy checks.And if that is the case, then how did any animal with an Intelligence of 3 or lower, such as chickens, cattle, goats, etc., become domesticated in Fantasyland if it is impossible to make Diplomacy checks against them?Uh, Ryze, you do know Handle Animal exists, right?There's no RAW on "approach a wild animal" or the calming of animals based on your own calm approach. That doesn't show as a suggested function of Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Intimidate... or anything else for that matter.
Honestly, in my own games I've just made this a function of Handle Animal the one time it came up. I figure, part of domesticating a wild animal is getting it calm enough to be around you; since domestication is under Handle Animal, this is like an abbreviated form of that.
Since that skill is Trained only, I'd be willing to sub in Survival, Knowledge: Nature, or just a straight-up Cha check if it came to it at my tables. YMMV.
That's wild empathy. It's like diplomacy but works on animals