PDA

View Full Version : Rich's Diplomacy Skill



TO_Incognito
2007-05-03, 07:04 PM
Hello everyone.

I have read Rich's modification of the diplomacy skill several times just for pleasure, and I like it a great deal: It really does seem to provide a rock solid framework in which diplomacy-oriented characters can work. Still, the system seems broken to me in some circumstances:

A low level party is walking along the road when they encounter a friendly level 16 Cleric of Pelor out for a stroll from his nearby temple. The party asks the Cleric for directions. Now, they have never met the Cleric before, so the relationship modifier is +0. Giving directions costs the Cleric nothing, but he gains nothing concrete from it either: the deal is even, and the circumstance modifier is +0. The Cleric has about a +6 Wisdom modifier, so the total Diplomacy DC is... 37. To get directions from a friendly guy on the road.

I would think such a circumstance might not even warrent a diplomacy check, but "A request for directions to someplace that is not a secret" is listed explicitly by Rich as an even circumstance in which to use the diplomacy skill. What is it I'm missing here?

Townopolis
2007-05-03, 08:09 PM
You really only need to roll (or should need to roll) diplomacy when your target isn't initially inclined to do what you want. For example, if the cleric was instead some guy who had a bad day and just wanted to be left alone, you might need a diplomacy check, but a friendly cleric of Pelor meeting with obvious do-gooders (you do adhere to the dress code, right?) will probably just give you the information no matter how much you stammer while asking for it.

TO_Incognito
2007-05-03, 10:43 PM
You really only need to roll (or should need to roll) diplomacy when your target isn't initially inclined to do what you want.

That sounds like a good baseline rule there; thanks.

Rad
2007-05-04, 06:33 AM
yes, that's a good guideline.
If not, you could make the 6 CHA barbarian ask for the opposite of what you want and have anybody act as you choose :smallsmile:

Martogh
2007-05-29, 10:35 AM
Hehe I like the 6 CHA barbarian comment :)

But yeah, I really liked his rules too and I think they're a good idea. However I see the same problem with the priest being a little more pervasive than has been recognized.

The problem really is that diplomacy is written as if its always going to be used from the players taking advantage of the NPCs. In this light, the higher lvl the NPC and the wiser they are, the more likely they are to see the player's deceptions and manipulations and the less likely they are to fall for them. When used in this light it is excellent.

However there are many examples when diplomacy can be used in sincerity of either trying to help or at least being neutral with the other person, where these rules no longer make sense. The priest example was one of those. It was argued that perhaps in this situation, since the priest would simply agree anyway, that we simply don't need diplomacy in those circumstance. But yet as was also said, what if the priest was in a bad mood? Surely then if we're going to use diplomacy to talk this priest out of his bad mood, the fact that he is a WISE and experienced priest would make him more receptive to changing his mood, rather than less? I fail to see the wisdom in sulking :P

Another example might be talking some frightened NPCs around and trying to convince them you are not hostile to them. If your PCs really are sincere, then shouldn't the NPCs experience and wisdom HELP them see this, instead of hinder them?

As such I think that sometimes their Wisdom and their lvl modifier should actually decrease the DC instead of always increasing it - depending on the sincerity and motivations of your PCs. In reality I think the level and Wisdom modifiers are there to resemble the NPC's sense motive ability with wiser and more experienced people more able to be discerning as to other's true agendas. Thus if you're trying to scam the NPC then it makes sense for those modifiers to increase the DC, but surely if you're trying to help them then their wisdom and experience should help them see that!

It's a little more difficult to impliment admittedly, because sometimes the players will be hiding their true agendas from the DM and so you can't always know whether you should be increasing the DC or decreasing it. but yet i cant help but feel that some sort of revision of this is needed. Apart from that though i must say its a great improvement on the old system and I still intend to use this one.

EvilElitest
2007-06-05, 11:28 AM
Hello everyone.

I have read Rich's modification of the diplomacy skill several times just for pleasure, and I like it a great deal: It really does seem to provide a rock solid framework in which diplomacy-oriented characters can work. Still, the system seems broken to me in some circumstances:

A low level party is walking along the road when they encounter a friendly level 16 Cleric of Pelor out for a stroll from his nearby temple. The party asks the Cleric for directions. Now, they have never met the Cleric before, so the relationship modifier is +0. Giving directions costs the Cleric nothing, but he gains nothing concrete from it either: the deal is even, and the circumstance modifier is +0. The Cleric has about a +6 Wisdom modifier, so the total Diplomacy DC is... 37. To get directions from a friendly guy on the road.

I would think such a circumstance might not even warrent a diplomacy check, but "A request for directions to someplace that is not a secret" is listed explicitly by Rich as an even circumstance in which to use the diplomacy skill. What is it I'm missing here?
No but hte cleric has something to gain, being nice to people, important in Pelor's tenents

A cleric of WEWe Das however
from,
EE

Runeir
2007-06-05, 01:48 PM
What I would like to know is this: because diplomacy has been changed from "making people like you" to "getting people to accept deals" then how will the players "make friends". Not every interaction has to be bargaining. Where diplomacy used to be how a bard could get everyone in a room to like him, now diplomacy is simply a businessman's skill. Granted, there are more things you can use diplomacy for, say "let us stay the night in your home" or "give me directions to the lost city," but what about simply being amiable.
Charisma is defined as a character's personal magnitude, which is to say it is all the factors that make a character attractive and likable to other people. So how does a character simply go about making friends? Role-playing? I would like to cynically note that the term "role-play" and "d20 system" don't exactly go hand-and-hand when there is a skill check or a feat for everything. What if the player doesn't know how to role-play making friends, after all being "amiable" means different things to different people. The point of charismatic characters is that they can easily become amiable, or at least convincing.

On the topic of the previous post, the diplomacy DC for getting the directions would be lowered by 10 if we added the "fantastic" Risk v. Reward modifier. So, instead of a DC 37 for directions it is a DC 27 (15 base +16 level +6 wis. mod +0 relationship -10 risk v. reward), hard for even some high-level characters to make!

Human Paragon 3
2007-06-11, 09:30 PM
Has anybody actually used this yet? I'd like to know if anybody's had success with it before I start using it.

I think in the above examples I would actually tweak the DCs a bit. For example, with the cleric of Pelor, I would probably give a +8 risk/reward modifier since he couldn't possibly lose anything for his trouble but stands to gain the satisfaction of helping others and serving his god.

With trying to get NPCs to realize that you are the good guys, I probably would throw a sense motive check in there. If they pass it, their wisdom bonus makes the DC easier for you, if they fail it, they over analyze the situation and it ends up hurting your shot.

Gavin Sage
2007-06-12, 09:19 AM
Regarding the Cleric situation. Why exactly would a high level character simply be marching along the road, doesn't he have better things to do with his time like smiting evil or something? Not in a general sense but in a campaign sense. If he's only there to answer basic directions there is no reason for him to be a high level cleric save for making this argument.

And the solution is simple, Diplomacy is to convince people to do things they wouldn't simply do otherwise. DM's do not have to require checks if they don't want to. Or even simpler, the PCs go ask the commoner next to the cleric for directions.

Runeir
2007-06-12, 06:01 PM
But the high level character argument proves a flaw in the system, and there are plenty of high level NPCs in certain campaigns. Also, the situation is the High Priest is going for a stroll. High priests usually don't go far from the holy ground they manage.

I do agree with Gavin, though. Why would a diplomacy check even be required for asking directions? Or other simple tasks that would be better left to role-playing? Now, if the DM really doesn't want to give directions the NPC that the players are speaking with could simply say "I don't know. Why don't you inquire at the inn?"

TO_Incognito
2007-06-13, 08:56 AM
I do agree with Gavin, though. Why would a diplomacy check even be required for asking directions? Or other simple tasks that would be better left to role-playing? Now, if the DM really doesn't want to give directions the NPC that the players are speaking with could simply say "I don't know. Why don't you inquire at the inn?"


Regarding the Cleric situation. Why exactly would a high level character simply be marching along the road, doesn't he have better things to do with his time like smiting evil or something? Not in a general sense but in a campaign sense. If he's only there to answer basic directions there is no reason for him to be a high level cleric save for making this argument.

And the solution is simple, Diplomacy is to convince people to do things they wouldn't simply do otherwise. DM's do not have to require checks if they don't want to. Or even simpler, the PCs go ask the commoner next to the cleric for directions.


It was argued that perhaps in this situation, since the priest would simply agree anyway, that we simply don't need diplomacy in those circumstance. But yet as was also said, what if the priest was in a bad mood? Surely then if we're going to use diplomacy to talk this priest out of his bad mood, the fact that he is a WISE and experienced priest would make him more receptive to changing his mood, rather than less?

Martogh did a good job of further nuancing the question. It isn't at all far-fetched for a high-level Cleric to be the only one on the road, perhaps out for a walk for just a minute from a backwoods temple to Pelor. What happens if he isn't initially in the mood to answer the question? Should it really be a DC 46 Diplomacy check to get directions out of him?

dr.cello
2007-06-14, 06:20 PM
I've found that when something sounds absurd, it usually is. One of the problems is that you, as the DM, are giving the characters a level 16 challenge when they aren't high enough level to deal with it. If the party was level 16, DC 37 wouldn't be that difficult to beat. (Assume the party has a character with maxed out diplomacy, that's a +20 already. With a charisma of just 18, if this is the party's face, +24. Assuming he has 5 ranks in bluff, +26. 11 or higher succeeds, and you'd have to roll that before you rolled a 1 in order to actually fail the negotiations. I think Diplomacy allows for an Aid Another check, so if you have someone who can meet a DC of 10, all the diplomat has to do is take 10.

This is assuming you want the PCs to actually roll in order to get directions. And honestly, I can see a high-level cleric deciding he's simply too busy to spend time giving directions to a bunch of low-level characters. Someone suggested this earlier: "I don't know. Perhaps you should inquire at the inn." A 16th level cleric is going to be an extremely important figure in his religion. Like the Pope, or close to it. You don't ask directions from the Pope.

One thing that does bother me about the new Diplomacy system is it gets rid of the generic attitudes from before. A number of rules I've been reading lately rely on them, and it seems like there needs to be some way to translate that into the new system.