Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Are things like Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy too easy?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5611117" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>Well, just because they have the right course of action doesn't mean that they automatically succeed. They could still fail the check of course. So, the game's challenge is a combination of coming up with a plan that is believable to the people at the table (or at least reasonably plausible - none of us are professional con artists I think, so, let's not set the bar too high) and then playing through that plan.</p><p></p><p>If the rolls fail (and the rolls and DC's most certainly can and should be modified by the context of the situation) then the plan fails. They don't get in the door.</p><p></p><p>If the rolls succeed, then, I believe, that they should be given the success they were expecting. Maybe not exactly the way they were expecting it, but, something that's actually a success.</p><p></p><p>OTOH, "Sorry, yes I believe you are a member of the diplomatic group, but, you still may not enter" is just the DM taking a success and spinning it into a failure. Where's the challenge in that?</p><p></p><p>Actually, let me turn the question around. Where is the challenge in a situation where you can never succeed? In JamesonCourage's example, he flat out states that the rolls won't let them succeed. At best, they only fail a little bit or a lot. Under no circumstance will they actually be allowed to succeed.</p><p></p><p>Apparently because there is no "Open the Gate" skill. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm :-S" data-shortname=":-S" /></p><p></p><p>And DM's wonder why players slowly stop attempting anything other than killing everything they meet. Why players stop trying new things after playing for a while. Why would players keep trying new things when new things cannot succeed? Kill everything works. It works almost all the time. Spinning success into failure just leads to players stopping trying.</p><p></p><p>Let me ask this then. Why is the supposedly "neutral arbiter" DM choosing the results that most disadvantage the PC's? How is the decision arrived at that despite the PC's not actually failing in anything they've done, they still fail being a neutral arbiter?</p><p></p><p>You guys are absolutely right. D&D does entitle the DM to do what you are saying. You certainly could choose the most disadvantageous result every time. Personally, I don't play that way anymore. It's too antagonistic for one. For another it's needlessly frustrating to the players and discourages any creativity in the future.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>First off, this would be funny. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> </p><p></p><p>But, allowing their success to actually count as a success isn't all that difficult.</p><p></p><p>PC: HI, I'm the Merry Prankster.</p><p>Guard: ((After a successful bluff)) Oh, please don't kill me sir! I'm just a poor guard. </p><p>PC: What? Huh? No... wait.</p><p>Guard: I'll do anything you want, just don't kill me sir!</p><p>PC: Yes! Yes! I'll carve you up if you don't open the gate!</p><p>Guard: Right away sir. Anything you say sir.</p><p></p><p>There, now the bluff succeeded, they got into the gate and they know that their disguise is a really, really bad idea. And, you have the added bonus of just what are they going to do with Mr. Guard now, particularly if your group is a good aligned one.</p><p></p><p>Isn't that a heck of a lot more fun than:</p><p></p><p>PC: I'm the Merry Prankster.</p><p>DM: Don't even bother rolling. He starts screaming his head off for the guards. They start shooting at you from the walls. </p><p>PC: Uh, what? What just happened?</p><p>DM: You don't know, they're just shooting at you. Roll for initiative.</p><p></p><p>Although, to be fair, that second one might be fun. I think the first one would be better, but the second one isn't bad.</p><p></p><p>But, typically, the next time something like this comes around, you can bet dollars to donuts, they scale the wall and don't bother talking to anyone. One Mass Invisibility and Levitate spell later and they enter the castle without any role play at all.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5611117, member: 22779"] Well, just because they have the right course of action doesn't mean that they automatically succeed. They could still fail the check of course. So, the game's challenge is a combination of coming up with a plan that is believable to the people at the table (or at least reasonably plausible - none of us are professional con artists I think, so, let's not set the bar too high) and then playing through that plan. If the rolls fail (and the rolls and DC's most certainly can and should be modified by the context of the situation) then the plan fails. They don't get in the door. If the rolls succeed, then, I believe, that they should be given the success they were expecting. Maybe not exactly the way they were expecting it, but, something that's actually a success. OTOH, "Sorry, yes I believe you are a member of the diplomatic group, but, you still may not enter" is just the DM taking a success and spinning it into a failure. Where's the challenge in that? Actually, let me turn the question around. Where is the challenge in a situation where you can never succeed? In JamesonCourage's example, he flat out states that the rolls won't let them succeed. At best, they only fail a little bit or a lot. Under no circumstance will they actually be allowed to succeed. Apparently because there is no "Open the Gate" skill. :-S And DM's wonder why players slowly stop attempting anything other than killing everything they meet. Why players stop trying new things after playing for a while. Why would players keep trying new things when new things cannot succeed? Kill everything works. It works almost all the time. Spinning success into failure just leads to players stopping trying. Let me ask this then. Why is the supposedly "neutral arbiter" DM choosing the results that most disadvantage the PC's? How is the decision arrived at that despite the PC's not actually failing in anything they've done, they still fail being a neutral arbiter? You guys are absolutely right. D&D does entitle the DM to do what you are saying. You certainly could choose the most disadvantageous result every time. Personally, I don't play that way anymore. It's too antagonistic for one. For another it's needlessly frustrating to the players and discourages any creativity in the future. First off, this would be funny. :D But, allowing their success to actually count as a success isn't all that difficult. PC: HI, I'm the Merry Prankster. Guard: ((After a successful bluff)) Oh, please don't kill me sir! I'm just a poor guard. PC: What? Huh? No... wait. Guard: I'll do anything you want, just don't kill me sir! PC: Yes! Yes! I'll carve you up if you don't open the gate! Guard: Right away sir. Anything you say sir. There, now the bluff succeeded, they got into the gate and they know that their disguise is a really, really bad idea. And, you have the added bonus of just what are they going to do with Mr. Guard now, particularly if your group is a good aligned one. Isn't that a heck of a lot more fun than: PC: I'm the Merry Prankster. DM: Don't even bother rolling. He starts screaming his head off for the guards. They start shooting at you from the walls. PC: Uh, what? What just happened? DM: You don't know, they're just shooting at you. Roll for initiative. Although, to be fair, that second one might be fun. I think the first one would be better, but the second one isn't bad. But, typically, the next time something like this comes around, you can bet dollars to donuts, they scale the wall and don't bother talking to anyone. One Mass Invisibility and Levitate spell later and they enter the castle without any role play at all. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Are things like Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy too easy?
Top