Dealing with talk monkeys

[N0Man]

So, I have this big encounter set up. It's got everything; there's monsters and traps and a big set-piece battle to bust into an enemy fortress! The players are all ready to go, and then the warlock says those dreaded words....

"I'm gonna use Diplomacy."

Oh god. He's level five, and he rolls a total of 32 (18 on the die + 4 charisma + 5 trained + 5 power bonus), so now I have to deal with it.

Well, he tried to talk the hobgoblins into letting him pass, and his check result certainly supported it, but I didn't want to let this big set piece go to waste (and there wasn't really any way to insert it later), so I had the hobs accept his claims of friendship but stand firm by their orders to let none pass, and therefore allow him to leave peacefully if he chose, but he'd have to fight his way in anyway if he wanted to go on. (Which they had to, so they wound up doing the fight anyway.)

How do I deal with this sort of thing? I felt bad that I essentially screwed him out of any benefit of his massive diplomacy roll, but at the same time Beguiling Tongue is an encounter power! So I can expect to be seeing this a lot in the future.

How should I handle trying to talk his way out of a fight?

I guess making one good talk roll should count sort of the same as making one strong attack roll, so it should remove a minion or two, or demoralize one normal monster, or something else that's approximately what one good attack roll would do. Even then I know he probably won't be happy with it, because I know he's angling to try to bypass the battle totally. Intimidate has some rules for how it might interact with combat, but Diplomacy and Bluff? I have no idea.

Honestly, I think that you handled it fine. It's absurd for someone to expect they can beat an entire counter with a single dice roll. Allowing them a chance to talk and allowing the players to leave freely is reasonable, maybe even generous.

Diplomacy is more of a skill to be used in social situations where hostility isn't already present, frequently part of a skill challenge.

If he wants to use Diplomacy, ask him what he is trying to get out of it, and what he actually says to them. Don't expect your player to be as glib as his character, so really look at the intention and the goals of it and how reasonable it is with that enemy.

Then consider the likelihood of them doing such a thing. That's going to be the basic DC there.

And figure in other modifiers, such as they are of a different culture and diplomacy might not follow the same rules (maybe -5), and they began as hostile (-10). Maybe that initial large success can help get rid of the hostility for the moment, and get them to listen (if there's a compelling reason... or bribe).

And as others have said, you can also allow it to open up a skill challenge. It totally isn't what was planned, and you might not feel comfortable with that route, but it's a valid route to pursue. You could make Diplomacy a *part* of it, but all the successes should *not* be just that skill. Other players need to contribute. Maybe Bluffs, *possibly* intimidate (or maybe that could backfire), or maybe History to spot and know something useful about this particular Tribe, or an Insight to get a feel for whether they are more loyal to their boss or some coins, or maybe one of either Nature, Heal, or Perception to notice that these orcs look very sleepy and hungry...

At least you didn't just totally ignore them the right to role (which some DM's would do).

Even worse, I had a DM have an NPC club me on the back of the head, automatically hitting, no save (3.5 Ed), and interrupt my attempt for talking our way out of a capture.

 

[LostSoul]

So here's a question:

Beguiling Tongue is a spell, right? That means that it could, in fact, be mind control.

"He won't risk his job and his life for his best friend - why would he do it for you?"
"Because he's suffering under the influence of my Beguiling Tongue."

Would that make a difference?

(I know how I would deal with it.)

 

[DracoSuave]

So here's a question:

Beguiling Tongue is a spell, right? That means that it could, in fact, be mind control.

"He won't risk his job and his life for his best friend - why would he do it for you?"
"Because he's suffering under the influence of my Beguiling Tongue."

Would that make a difference?

(I know how I would deal with it.)

The power source of an ability does not confer additional abilities beyond how it interracts with your feats. It does not matter if it is an exploit, spell, prayer, evocation, discipline, or um... er... uh... whatever it is called that Shadow does.

So, no, Beguiling Tongue doesn't allow you to do more with it than a Martial ability would with the same text.

 

[Blackbrrd]

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

If the players want the guards to let them pass, they will want something in return. It is their hide that will get a lashing if it is discovered that they have let the players pass unchallenged.

Personally I only do very minor favours for people I don't know. Why should the monsters/npcs be different? Evil monsters/npcs are typically very egoistic. They consider what would benefit them, not anybody else.

Let us take the example with the hobgoblins. The party approaches them and wants to pass. The hobgoblins are persuaded that it would be a good idea to let them pass by the warlocks sweet tongue. 5 minutes later the hobgoblin considers the effect of letting the players pass. This might not have been a good idea? He dispatches maybe half his force to fall the players in the back when they come across another encounter.

 

[Klaus]

So here's a question:

Beguiling Tongue is a spell, right? That means that it could, in fact, be mind control.

"He won't risk his job and his life for his best friend - why would he do it for you?"
"Because he's suffering under the influence of my Beguiling Tongue."

Would that make a difference?

(I know how I would deal with it.)

It could not, since the power doesn't have the "Charm" keyword. Your voice sounds more pleasant, your demeanor more amiable, but that doesn't mean mind control. In some instances it means that the party is taken captive, instead of a TPK...

 

[Keenath]

Start throwing monsters that don't know their language or don't care in the future.

Doctor, it hurts when I do this...

A single roll is never going to get a party past a well guarded outpost. It doesn't matter if it's steatlh or diplomacy; you simply don't completely 'disarm' the opposition by making one skill roll. That's the reason for the skill challenge system.

Right, that's why I said all that about giving some sort of combat benefit approximately equivalent to one good sword hit.

It's a perfect opportunity for a free-form skill challenge. Make it just as tough as the combat is likely to be, or it's too easy a success. If they succeed, then give them the experience that they would have gained by killing their opponents. Let them have some fun with it, but don't make it easy.

In general that's good advice, and what I would do, but as I said in the original post, my main issue is when I want them to go ahead and fight in among the spinning blades and such.

 

[Keenath]

I think if you are planning on making a diplomat PC, or someone with an aversion to killing, you need to be up front about it, and try to keep to that character ideal. The DM can then plan for that eventuality, and allow you to shine occasionally.

Oh, he has no real aversion to killing. He's the most evil-curious player (and yes, I mean player) in the group! The running gag is, if we find slaves, he'll free them... from life!

He just happens to also love manipulating people, thus the high bluff and diplomacy checks.

In my opinion if the players try to talk with humanoids from time to time and do not slaughter everyone (like in the example above) I think you should allow Diplomacy to work.

Well, YEAH! If it were goblin bandits on the road or something, I'd have no problem with talking things out (this actually happened in the previous adventure), but sometimes he tries to talk out of a confrontation I don't want him to avoid.

And for "winning an encouter with one attack", how about 20 minutes of pure roleplay and a skill challenge? I would go for it!

Right, and that's what happened with the gobs; his strong diplo check earned them a tense interview with the head bandit during which everyone provided lots of fun RP and so on, and they ultimately talked the goblins out of attacking with a mixture of Intimidate (Do you have any idea how many of you will die if you attack us?), Diplomacy (I'm sure we can come to some sort of peaceful agreement!) and Bluff (We're just passing through, we won't do anything to upset the balance of power around here...)

 

[Keenath]

On the other hand, if the warlock had had the sense to, he might have been able to extract some information about the fight from his new friend, or even persuade him not to fight too hard (ie - to back off once he's bloodied instead of fighting to the death, for example).

I had them kind of acting like schoolyard bullies at that point, who thought it was hilarious when the PCs stepped into the trapped area, so they were responding with, "Yeah, yeah! We're friends now! C'mon over here! <snicker snicker>"

If he wants to use Diplomacy, ask him what he is trying to get out of it, and what he actually says to them. Don't expect your player to be as glib as his character, so really look at the intention and the goals of it and how reasonable it is with that enemy.

I probably will just have to spend more time in OOC conversation with the player to give him an idea of what's appropriate and what isn't, as in "No, 'I want to make them let us pass' is not appropriate for a single check'; you could ask them to negotiate, though..." He's actually the weakest RPer at the table, and the guy with the best talky checks, so a lot of times he needs help on how to use his big skill checks properly. (He's the guy who has a huge bluff check but can't ever think up believable lies, and so he comes up with stupid stuff like, "Uh.... I'm a green dragon!")

I've started refusing to accept stupid comments or bad ideas, instead insisting that he (with the group's help) come up with debate points or bluffs that are more appropriate.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Well, YEAH! If it were goblin bandits on the road or something, I'd have no problem with talking things out (this actually happened in the previous adventure), but sometimes he tries to talk out of a confrontation I don't want him to avoid.

I have a real problem with your intended approach. Essentially, you want to force the party into a fight. So, just have the bad guys attack. 'Nuff said. If, on the other hand, you want DMing advice on how to railroad the party through RP, well, that's another problem that I bet a lot of people will have trouble helping you with.

 

[ki11erDM]

What I would have done:

A dark figure approaches the gates of a hobgoblin encampment followed closely by what appear to be human bounty hunters. The two guards stumble over each other to see who will speak to the new comer. “Halt!” one finally says with a quiver in his voice. Barely showing, the cloaked figure waves his hand and speaks “I will pass”, the power of his voice and its demonic inflections cause the guards to stumble back pushing open the gates.

The inner sanctum guards turn and see the new comers for what they really are, heroes, but not before hell begins to rain.

Or, "hay that was a great roll! You get past the front door and have surprise on the guards within."