Problems with the Diplomacy skill (plus a total halt to a campaign)

[Jon_Dahl]

Within the game-mechanics, how would you resolve the following dialogue?
"Let us in. We want to check your house."
"What?! Hell no!"
"Please reconsider."
"NO!"
"Ok, bye then."
(end of conversation)

I see a few glaring problems with the diplomacy skill:
1. It requires at least a one minute of conversation. Sometimes a player briefly explains the situation (maybe a 2-3 fullround actions) and then easily gives up with the conversation. The minimum timeframe is not reached.
2. Sometimes it's hard to know if they are trying to bluff, negotiate or intimidate. We can't roll all this at once.
3. It's hard to know if I should ask for a rushed diplomacy check (-10) or a standard one.

In my game the players need to investigate a house for secret doors. This is crucial for the campaign and I can easily compare this to a dungeon crawl and the moment where the players first enter the dungeon; if they don't enter the dungeon, there is no dungeon crawl. Searching for secret doors from the house is the nexus of the adventure.

At the moment, there's a family living in the house and they're not too keen on having stangers in the house. You can imagine if somewhere knocked on your door and asked to check your house. It's really not that appealing.

I have made an effort to minimize railroading. You can negotiate with the husband or the wife or with both (or intimidate them or bluff them), or you can sneak into the house or you can use magic or you come with a ruse in order to have the house cleared. Also an NPC offers the players a chance to use forged documents to pose as members of the city guard and investigate the house.

But in this case the players went over to the house and asked a few questions from the man. The husband answered them. Then the party spokesman asked to enter the house but he said "no". After that the group went back to the tavern and will not investigate the case any further.

Now I don't know if I should somehow railroad them to the adventure or should I just accept the fact that they don't want to investigate the house. They have plenty of ways to do it and since the whole group is exclusively of the neutral alignment, it shouldn't be against their alignment to use underhanded methods to investigate the house.

 

[pemerton]

Up to the second-last paragraph I would have said: whatever approach the players decide to have their PCs take, let it work!, because otherwise your scenario is going to stall.

But it's too late for that now. So it seems to me that you need to give the PCs another reason to check out the house, which the players will pick up and act on.

One pretty blatant way to proceed would be this: when the PCs leave the tavern and are walking down the street next to the house, the street surface gives way and one of the PCs falls through into a dusty underground chamber (give them a Reflex save, or Acro check, or whatever is appropriate, to avoid damage). It is obviously a secret room attached to the cellar of the house (you describe it in such a way that this is obvious from the PC's side of the room - maybe they can see where there is only a single course of bricks, backed by a timber frame, in an otherwise double-brick cellar wall - the secret door on the cellar side which is not secret at all on this side). And in the dusty secret room are X, Y and Z - whatever items will stimulate the PCs' (and your players') interests in the mystery of the house.

If that doesn't instigate a more extensive search for secret doors in the house - with or without cooperation from its residents - then I'm not sure what would! And you'll certainly know for sure that they players really don't care about your house and its secret doors!

More subtle approaches involve someone offering to pay them to sneak in, them overhearing two thugs in the tavern talking about the house and its treasures, etc. But I actually prefer the blatant approach because (i) it makes the potential significance of the house's secret so obvious, and (ii) gives the players a really simple opportunity to signal that they're not interested in the house - they have their PCs climb out of the dusty room and proceed on their way - so you are in no danger of inadvertantly railroading them.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I don't quite understand where the diplomacy check came into your scenario. If we think back to a traditional view of how NPCs react to PCs, then your homeowners might be suspicious, but they are not outright hostile, but neither are they neutral. If they were outright hostile, which I find unlikely when they live in a city full of strangers, sure, there's no chance of persuasion. If they are merely suspicious, it's just a higher DC diplomacy check, and there's no way you should shut down the conversation before they get a chance to make that check. The fact is, that these people must have some motivations: are they aware of the dungeon beneath their home? How will they respond if they are made aware? What might motivate them to agree to entry?

I could imagine that some families might be bribeable - accepting a share of whatever loot the party finds. Others might be merely concerned for their safety, and go straight to the city watch to deal with the problem. Some may indeed be crazed survivalist leave-me-alone types, but then I would have expected them to make a number of enemies in the city who might help your party. Allow them, at the very least, to sense motive the homeowners, or to gather information at the inn about them, so that they might form an opinion of how to deal with these people, otherwise they appear to be a pointless and irrational barrier to your adventure.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

I don't quite understand where the diplomacy check came into your scenario. If we think back to a traditional view of how NPCs react to PCs, then your homeowners might be suspicious, but they are not outright hostile, but neither are they neutral. If they were outright hostile, which I find unlikely when they live in a city full of strangers, sure, there's no chance of persuasion. If they are merely suspicious, it's just a higher DC diplomacy check, and there's no way you should shut down the conversation before they get a chance to make that check. The fact is, that these people must have some motivations: are they aware of the dungeon beneath their home? How will they respond if they are made aware? What might motivate them to agree to entry?

I could imagine that some families might be bribeable - accepting a share of whatever loot the party finds. Others might be merely concerned for their safety, and go straight to the city watch to deal with the problem. Some may indeed be crazed survivalist leave-me-alone types, but then I would have expected them to make a number of enemies in the city who might help your party. Allow them, at the very least, to sense motive the homeowners, or to gather information at the inn about them, so that they might form an opinion of how to deal with these people, otherwise they appear to be a pointless and irrational barrier to your adventure.

There was no diplomacy check because the persuasion was too brief. There were grounds for a rushed diplomacy check, but I felt that would've been unfair to roll it since the chance of success was very low (a huge penalty). It would've been rolled only by request.

The husband was Indifferent towards the players, believe it or not. He has a tendency to be abrasive and use expletives even with his closest friends, but he would have continued to speak with the players as long as they wanted and he would've only threatened to if the players had escalated the situation in some not-so-smart way. He was hard and negative with them, also a bit suspicious, but ready to talk. A mere diplomacy check DC 15 would've convinced him to let the players in. A decent bribe would've provided a bonus to the roll.

The players did roll Sense Motive but they failed. Gathering information about the family would reveal nothing: It's just a normal family with a big-mouthed head-of-the-family. Gathering Information about the old house itself could reveal all kinds of things. In general, all kinds of approaches are allowed. Really.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Ah so the problem lay more with the party just giving up when they couldn't gain entry easily - that is frustrating. I know you don't want to railroad them, but perhaps you can arrange an encounter with the wife in the marketplace, and she could apologise for her husband's behaviour and perhaps ask what they wanted to check for. If you can strike up conversation that way, they at least have to decide whether to explain what they wanted, and she would rightfully be concerned if there was danger to her household.

 

[Starfox]

Also, some players like to act, other are more of the "I make a Diplomacy check" variety. That the conversation between the player and you was brief does not mean that you have to penalize the players for taking too little time. The player stated his objective and the arguments he'd use. Since there was no time pressure, I't take it to a normal, unpenalized Diplomacy roll at that point. There is no need for the player to keep a conversation going for a full minute in order for his character to do so in-world.

 

[sheadunne]

I'm seeing 4 ways your entry into your "dungeon crawl" could end before it begins. 1) you want them to talk in real time, 2) a single die roll determines entry, 3) another die roll determine whether they find they secret door, and 4) they have to open the secret door. I don't think rolling should have been required for any of those things since if any of them fail, the adventure fails.

That aside, you could have someone at the tavern bring up the couple and give them clues on how to get inside. "Old John is a little short on money of late, he just got fired from his job." "John is looking for a gift for his wife for their 20th anniversary and she loves diamonds." "Ester went to the market yesterday and couldn't find plums to make her favorite pie." You get the idea. I wouldn't require a gather info roll or anything, just normal tavern talk and people love to gossip.

Another option is to have a rival person/party break into the house that night and murder the couple, but they didn't find the secret door. The following night the party can head over to the house and take their time looking.

If the adventure relies on the party getting to the secret doors, remove the barriers to getting it going. Don't roll a single die to determine whether they can start the adventure or not. Otherwise you should just flip a coin and heads they can play and tails they go home.

 

[amerigoV]

What's in the dungeon? Maybe it comes out, eats the people in the house, and goes on a rampage. Be sure to describe it so the PCs feel really guity about sitting on the butts in the tavern.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Within the game-mechanics, how would you resolve the following dialogue?
"Let us in. We want to check your house."
"What?! Hell no!"
"Please reconsider."
"NO!"
"Ok, bye then."
(end of conversation)

I see a few glaring problems with the diplomacy skill:
1. It requires at least a one minute of conversation. Sometimes a player briefly explains the situation (maybe a 2-3 fullround actions) and then easily gives up with the conversation. The minimum timeframe is not reached.

This is a rushed check.

2. Sometimes it's hard to know if they are trying to bluff, negotiate or intimidate. We can't roll all this at once.

Sounded like a negotiation attempt. Mind you, they were offering nothing, in return for potentially threatening behavior (armed or magic-using strangers want to go inside your house).

3. It's hard to know if I should ask for a rushed diplomacy check (-10) or a standard one.

That was rushed. It wouldn't have been rushed if the heroes had given reasons to enter the house.

In my game the players need to investigate a house for secret doors. This is crucial for the campaign and I can easily compare this to a dungeon crawl and the moment where the players first enter the dungeon; if they don't enter the dungeon, there is no dungeon crawl. Searching for secret doors from the house is the nexus of the adventure.

At the moment, there's a family living in the house and they're not too keen on having stangers in the house. You can imagine if somewhere knocked on your door and asked to check your house. It's really not that appealing.

I have made an effort to minimize railroading. You can negotiate with the husband or the wife or with both (or intimidate them or bluff them), or you can sneak into the house or you can use magic or you come with a ruse in order to have the house cleared. Also an NPC offers the players a chance to use forged documents to pose as members of the city guard and investigate the house.

But in this case the players went over to the house and asked a few questions from the man. The husband answered them. Then the party spokesman asked to enter the house but he said "no". After that the group went back to the tavern and will not investigate the case any further.

Now I don't know if I should somehow railroad them to the adventure or should I just accept the fact that they don't want to investigate the house. They have plenty of ways to do it and since the whole group is exclusively of the neutral alignment, it shouldn't be against their alignment to use underhanded methods to investigate the house.

Someone needs to bring the heroes info about the house. Maybe someone attacked or killed a resident of the house, even if it was by accident. (The villains might be against killing the residents, as they provide good cover.)

Alternatively, tell them to try again, but with an actual plan of what they'll say before they go there. Before you know it, there'll be an elaborate con.

Also, see this: http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jFppYwv7OUkegKhONNF.html

This is a great Diplomacy system. It makes Diplomacy a negotation, not a "make friends" skill. But it seems you're using Diplomacy that way already.

The heroes have no relationship with the target, so no modifier.

The risk/reward is probably unfavorable (-5 to check, or +5 to DC, if you prefer) because letting armed strangers in the house is bad news. Using forged documents could have changed this, of course. (Keeping cops out of your hose is a risk, letting them in avoids risk. Unless you're hiding evidence, of course.)

So in essence, the heroes botched it royally. They took a penalty for rushing it and another penalty for presenting moderate risk with no reward whatsoever.

 

[Mordikenn]

That conversation in the example does sound like how a lot of Diplomacy checks go...

I also had a bard in my game who would chant "be my friend, be my friend, be my friend!" when he used suggestion/ charm/ dominate. It was pretty hilarious!

As for the dilemma with railroading and getting them to check for secret doors... you can always just put your dungeon somewhere else! The beautiful thing about DMing is that they don't know the dungeon wasn't, say, in the second guy's house they actually did check all along.