Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="papa_laz" data-source="post: 4722464" data-attributes="member: 7992">Thanks guys. These are all very good suggestions and I will definitely be taking them on board. As far as the nature of the group goes, they work well together when necessary and there is generally a level of party cohesion, but they bicker and bully each other constantly when not in danger. This is not something I'm going to try and moderate as it makes the game hilarious, also the players know if they don't work together I will have no qualms about killing their PC's. If the party splinters because of these internal divides then so be it. I like to give the players real choice in their actions, and if this results in an unplayable situation then so be it.As far as the opposed intimidate checks I now realise I may not have handled the situation correctly. After reading your replies I think a better option would have been to let it either escalate or subside. The argument was started by the party cleric who was demanding that the druid give him a document the party had just acquired. The druid refused which led to an argument, and the cleric then requested to make an intimidate check. I guess the correct way to play it would've been to make the cleric roleplay this initimidation and make threats of violence, and possibly attack if he chooses (I highly doubt he would). After all the choice is ultimately down to the druid to either give him the document, walk away, or fight, and although he won the dice roll, if he lost it would've made him feel that his roleplaying actions were meaningless.I'm still not entirely decided on this, and I feel that having ranks in intimidate should count for something in such situations. But on the other hand I think its more important to encourage meaningful roleplaying. In other situations that can't possibly be roleplayed such as one PC pickpocketing the other I'd use opposed dice rolls, but for negotiations and intimidation I'm not sure. I guess I'll have to play it by ear and see what works.Aberzanzorax, I guess the difference is that I rewarded XP for a successful and meaningful bluff which was beneficial for the party. But they handled the torture scene badly, which resulted in one PC being crippled, which makes me think that they haven't earned a reward. I think I'm probably going to give them 100-200 XP for surviving, but even then I'm reluctant. What do you think is a reasonable amount of XP to reward level 5 characters who have survived the torture chamber? Or do you think I should give them nothing?</blockquote>

Verification