Hi guys, right now we're playing Wrath of the Righteous. My co-gm is running this one (we trade off each campaign) and he is a stickler for running things RAW, admittedly usually taken in a way that least benefits the party. I'm familiar with the AP as I was prepping to run it for my last campaign before we switched to Rise of the Runelords since I thought mythic rules might be a bit much for the two new players joining the campaign.
Warning: Very slight spoilers ahead.
Now the issue at hand, I’m aware that the help and potential rewards from the group of NPCs that joins you in the beginning of the campaign hinges on making them friendly and helpful, namely the monetary reward offered by one of the NPCs once you escape the caverns.
The problem being that if you take everything RAW, his starting attitude is unfriendly, now even if you succeed every diplomacy roll to influence his attitude, the best you can hope for is friendly if you beat the DC by 5, but by RAW you can't attempt to influence that NPC again until his attitude has already reset to unfriendly.
I am aware that as a GM you should read between the lines that if there is a potential reward listed in the AP for making him helpful, that you should be able to attain it, and I know that diplomacy also says attitudes may be increased for a longer duration at GM discretion, but has nothing listed about increasing attitude long term or a second time even if you somehow get a secondary check while they like you more. What I am looking for is any concrete rules, FAQ, or examples that I can show to my co-gm. A GM who is a bit socially awkward and gets quite defensive if his reading of the rules is questioned without something to back it up.
Now I’ve seen these discussions devolve into blame games for how players should bow to their GMs whims or on the flip side should just quit the game to teach the GM a lesson, so let me just conclude by saying. The GM is a great guy, and we all have fun together, he just sometimes looses sight of the fact that were all playing a game together and it isn’t a game of him vs the players.
If I can bring him around with my own real world diplomacy check backed up by some good info, rather than losing players due to frustration, I will be an incredibly happy man.
Thanks in advance for anything you guys can provide.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
After you have used Diplomacy to improve an NPC's attitude from unfriendly to indifferent or friendly, why would his attitude revert to unfriendly? I could not find anything in the standard rules to justify that happening. If it is a rule specific to the scenario, that might justify (or imply, or directly state) other changes that would alter other Diplomacy rules.
There is also the open question as to whether you can come back later for more Diplomacy to improve the NPC's attitude further. I would assume that the two step limit is for a single interaction.
Hey David, thanks for the reply. The rules for diplomacy he is stuck on are as follows.
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.
Diplomacy wrote: Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion). Pretty plain as day, and there are several features that can extend this duration. Because your initial attitude is dependent on the circumstances of your personage and motivations in relation to theirs. You influence it to make someone who would not normally like you be more likely to at least lend you their ear, but in the end, an enemy is still your enemy, and some things can be so against you that they are simply immune to diplomacy.
If you actually are nice to someone for an extended period of time such that they truly are your friend or better, that isn't influencing someone, that's just good rp, and thus the "change" to a nicer attitude isn't temporary.
Mechanics point of view:
what you are looking at is a skill challenge. The PC's make a skill check (Diplomacy) if they want and get a reward(gold & help) for making a DC, his initial attitude sets the DC. You can clearly see that the PCs may get help but not the reward if they don't succeed at the check.
As a GM you have to decide if there are going to be multiple tries (over days) to get that reward or a scaled reward system, or just a one shot. If the PCs know/suspect there's a reward and try again and again to get it, that's pretty much metagaming or running with "kid's gloves". Pretty much in Paizo scenarios it's a one shot (I've run hundreds of them). It looks scaled so if they miss the DC on the first attempt the gold is gone but possible help remains. In this way the NPC acts as guard rails in case of a near TPK.
I'd check the scenario to see if there are interaction points written into the scenario, as each of those is another chance.
Sometimes (as it may be a hard plot point) you have to override the skill check as it's a game and a story and some things just gotta happen (see skill description). At times the Bard has to make tough choices and not leave the audience hangin as The Play must Go On.
The PCs take 10 rounds, give you their statements & you quietly determine any circumstance bonuses/penalties, a PC makes a roll and you check the DC, and do what the rules say putting yourself in the NPC's shoes. If the PCs make the roll then act poorly (it happens as they treat it like a done deal) start making checks as his attitude is going to deteriorate. Attitude isn't a set thing that goes on forever, it changes with interactions and time.
Story PoV:
Read the scenario/AP and determine what the NPC's motivation is. Would he go it with any group? Say an Aspis Consortium group? If he has sufficient motivation he'll tag along as he has motive. He could follow at a distance particularly if he's interested in the outcome but neutral towards the party, say 5 rounds behind the PCs.
you could convert some gold into a cure light potion just in case... and make sure the NPC has a weapon and some common stuff. Those details are often glossed over and left to the GM.
Perhaps look at the optional rules around Contacts. I've never used this mechanic but my understanding that it is geared towards long term cooperation from NPCs.
It may be that these NPCs begin with a trust score of 1 based on the events of the AP. As the campaign advances, perhaps short term you use Diplomacy to improve their reactions for one-off favors, but the more you work with them the more chances there are to improve that Trust score and thus use them as Contacts long term.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
So one way to extend the duration of the improved attitude might be by not exploiting it immediately. Then, when you interact with them 24+ hours later, perhaps their attitudes have not reverted all the way to where they were (or perhaps even at all). As the rule itself states, the duration of the improved attitude is up to GM discretion.
Torall wrote: If I can bring him around with my own real world diplomacy check backed up by some good info, rather than losing players due to frustration, I will be an incredibly happy man. I'm a little curious about this comment here. Why would you lose players due to frustration over a missed reward that they don't know they've missed out on? I'm not familiar with the AP, but is there something in the AP that alerts the players that there is a reward possible for good diplomacy? Is that likely to be brought up out of character in a metagaming fashion? (Haha you missed out on a billion gp reward you could have had).
I would imagine that there are more ways to influence an npc attitude than just diplomacy (or other social skills). Things such as helping someone, providing forms of personal benefit or advancement, etc SHOULD be taken into account.
Then there is prior reputation, the knowledge skill element of 'social combat', a good reputation should translate.
Finally there is the story-telling element, MINOR rules should not hinder the meta-narrative thus EXCEPTIONS SHOULD EXIST.
strayshift wrote: I would imagine that there are more ways to influence an npc attitude than just diplomacy (or other social skills). Things such as helping someone, providing forms of personal benefit or advancement, etc SHOULD be taken into account.
Then there is prior reputation, the knowledge skill element of 'social combat', a good reputation should translate.
Finally there is the story-telling element, MINOR rules should not hinder the meta-narrative thus EXCEPTIONS SHOULD EXIST.
These things aren't diplomacy. This is what is called "being a friend" in the real world and should result in (eventual) shifts of attitude. Diplomacy is specifically for getting someone to realize that your interests align, even when they don't really like you as a friend, and thus be more likely than normal to help/go along with what you want.
It's not impossible or even harder for an ugly, unwashed (read low charisma) homeless person to make friends (well, maybe it is because they may start at generally lower dispositions, but that natural change by exposure and not being a c!@+ over time isn't lessened), but it is harder for them to walk through the street and get someone to let them use their phone than a celebrity or even just a man in a business suit.
AwesomenessDog wrote: strayshift wrote: I would imagine that there are more ways to influence an npc attitude than just diplomacy (or other social skills). Things such as helping someone, providing forms of personal benefit or advancement, etc SHOULD be taken into account.
Then there is prior reputation, the knowledge skill element of 'social combat', a good reputation should translate.
Finally there is the story-telling element, MINOR rules should not hinder the meta-narrative thus EXCEPTIONS SHOULD EXIST.
These things aren't diplomacy. This is what is called "being a friend" in the real world and should result in (eventual) shifts of attitude. Diplomacy is specifically for getting someone to realize that your interests align, even when they don't really like you as a friend, and thus be more likely than normal to help/go along with what you want.
It's not impossible or even harder for an ugly, unwashed (read low charisma) homeless person to make friends (well, maybe it is because they may start at generally lower dispositions, but that natural change by exposure and not being a c%+% over time isn't lessened), but it is harder for them to walk through the street and get someone to let them use their phone than a celebrity or even just a man in a business suit. Fully aware of that thank you but the o.p.'s dilemma was "The problem being that if you take everything RAW, his starting attitude is unfriendly, now even if you succeed every diplomacy roll to influence his attitude, the best you can hope for is friendly if you beat the DC by 5, but by RAW you can't attempt to influence that NPC again until his attitude has already reset to unfriendly."
I was trying to point out ways he (as DM) could effectively solve the dilemma.
Try not to be so literal.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
