Changing Attitude of NPCs

[Nathan]

The Diplomacy check should just be used to "translate" what the player says into what the character says and how the character says it. If your player just says "I'll use Diplomacy on the Guards" rather than even trying to roleplay through it, then you are just playing Diablo with dice.

I totally agree with you at this point. However, how would role-play a PC with for example INT 5 and a high diplomacy skill? The PC maybe a little bit too dumb to find the right things to say to a guard. On the other hand, he should be able to talk his way through the guards...

[/B]
It's not difficult to get ultra-high Diplomacy checks with the proper skills, feats, and PrCs (not to mention the too-cheap magic items for boosting skills). If you let a PC just "turn off" combat with a single die-roll, your game is going to become un-fun rather quickly (at least for all the non-Diplomats in the group). [/B]

There are a lot of ways to "turn off" combat with a single die-roll. A psion's Mind Blast (providing he rolls a high DC) is one which comes to my mind...

Furthermore, as a DM I have heard complains by my players that they want to circumvent combats by negotiations, etc. more often.

 

[IceBear]

As I stated above, I agree that diplomancy should be able to diffuse a situation, but it would take time and effort on the part of the PCs.

I'd ask the player to give me a quick overview of what he wanted to say and then determine how long it would take in rounds to say it. At the end of that time, I'd allow a diplomacy check with a substantial penalty due to the combat situation but then with postive modifiers for what the character said (given the circumstances). However, if any of the PCs fought back during this time, I'd rule an auto failure on the diplomancy check ("What!? You want use to stop fighting, but while you were wooing us with your pretty words, your friends chopped off Gary's head!!!!! I don't think so!!!")

It's much easier to stop a fight before it has started than after one has broken out - especially if you're fighting back just as hard.

IceBear

 

[Petrosian]

Add me to the "yes, use diplomacy skill" but also add in that the DCs in the book do not take into account "circumstantial" modifiers, so sometimes the rolls will be easier and sometimes tougher.

Avoiding a fight after slaughtering someone's brother in front of him... more difficult, UNLESS he is the "sneak away and kill you later" type.

Avoid a fight vs a non-evil guy when innocents he cares abound and conflict is likely to cause them harm, more likely.

etc etc etc.

Heck, just a few sessions ago, the PCs used diplomacy a lot... even dividing the opposition at one point.

 

[Nathan]

If you don't mind, let me quote myself since there is one question left which I'm interested in:

Regarding this topic, I have one further question: some bardic instruments (from S&S) can change NPC attitudes like the harmonica after a successful Perform check. What should be the DC of this check?

Nathan

 

[Al]

I'm pretty certain that a Diplomacy check is the equal of a Charisma check with reference to influencing PC attitudes. Yes, this makes it a strong skill, but only as strong as a well-deployed Bluff, and not as useful in absolutely battle terms as e.g.s Tumble, Listen/Spot, Hide/Mv Silent.

I also impose a -20 penalty in combat, and Rule0 certain failures (such as stealing the royal sceptre).