D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Maxperson]

That doesn't hold. The player does not decide that the monster shoves their character using its Athletics skill.

Being shoved is not a behavior. The player gets to decide his PC's behaviors, not whether he gets shoved in combat or not.

 

[Maxperson]

Indeed yes, that is precisely my point. Read the post I am replying to.

Clarification - the player does not get to decide that their character is shoved or not shoved by the champion using its Athletics skill, even though moving 5 foot is something that their character will end up doing.

True.

Similarly, the player does not get to decide if the champion does or not intimidate their character using its Intimidate skill, even though being intimidated (consequences per exemplars in ability checks, and DMG) is something their character will end up doing.

False. The rules very strong imply that social skills vs. PCs are up to the player to decide, but combat is not up to the player to decide.

 

[clearstream]

Being shoved is not a behavior. The player gets to decide his PC's behaviors, not whether he gets shoved in combat or not.

Where do the rules use the word behaviour?

 

[Maxperson]

Where do the rules use the word behaviour?

The rules say the player decides what his PC thinks and does. It doesn't matter how intimidating you are, if my PC doesn't think you are intimidating, you are not. That's my decision per the rules as written. Same with persuasion. You might think you are the most persuasive being in the multiverse, but if I determine that my PC thinks you are an unconvincing buffoon, that's what you are to him.

 

[clearstream]

The rules say the player decides what his PC thinks and does. It doesn't matter how intimidating you are, if my PC doesn't think you are intimidating, you are not. That's my decision per the rules as written. Same with persuasion. You might think you are the most persuasive being in the multiverse, but if I determine that my PC thinks you are an unconvincing buffoon, that's what you are to him.

Moving is an act. Something a character does.

 

[Maxperson]

Moving is an act. Something a character does.

Specific beats general. An ability that specifically moves a PC trumps the players general rule desire not to move.

 

[clearstream]

Specific beats general. An ability that specifically moves a PC trumps the players general rule desire not to move.

Yes. Just as a non-magical ability like menacing Attack can make a character feel fear, and a spell can make a character feel friendship.

Generally, players decide. The powerful exception is where game mechanics specifically impose.

 

[Mordhau]

I'm not convinced the rules intentionally leave it up to the player how they act in response to social interactions. As someone above said, the fact that monsters have social proficiencies rather implies that wasn't intended.

However, as there's none of the rules you would need to actually make the social proficiencies work very effectively with PCs, it seems to me that it just wasn't really considered at all.

What you get down to is, it seems pretty pointless arguing about what the game officially stated.

Skills were something the designers only included at all due to feedback from the playerbase in playtesting. They're a pretty marginal part of the rules - for a lot of the skills the sum total of the rules for the skill is the name of the skill. Even the attitude categories being discussed in the DMG are basically just a cut down variaton of the 3rd edition diplomacy rules.

The answers are not to be found in the books. They're to be found at your game tables.

It's weird how much people treat this sloppy slapdash frankenstein's monster of a game as if it is some intricate carefully considered design.

 

[Maxperson]

You mean the 3.5 edition where the persuasion skill (diplomacy) explicitly only influenced NPCs?

Diplomacy (Cha)​

Check​

You can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check; see the Influencing NPC Attitudes sidebar, below, for basic DCs. In negotiations, participants roll opposed Diplomacy checks, and the winner gains the advantage. Opposed checks also resolve situations when two advocates or diplomats plead opposite cases in a hearing before a third party.

***

Influencing NPC Attitudes​

Use the table below to determine the effectiveness of Diplomacy checks (or Charisma checks) made to influence the attitude of a nonplayer character, or wild empathy checks made to influence the attitude of an animal or magical beast.

And nothing indicates in any way that they've abandoned that for 5e. The best you can say is that even though the social interaction rules heavily imply that they are only to be used against NPCs, they don't explicitly say that. Nothing at all supports their use against PCs. There's not one example of it anywhere in any official 5e book.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes. Just as a non-magical ability like menacing Attack can make a character feel fear, and a spell can make a character feel friendship.

Sure, if the specific rule for a class ability, racial ability, spell, etc. says so. There are no such specific rules for social skills.