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: 5611561" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>So, what's the point of bluffing then?</p><p></p><p>If all a bluff does is make someone believe something, but, has zero influence over what they actually do about that belief, then what's the point? Great! I succeeded in my bluff. He believes me. Now, I can actually make the next roll that might actually matter. Oh, wait... that roll didn't matter either since diplomacy doesn't actually make anyone do anything, it only influences reaction... I guess I'll do Intimidate. But, that doesn't make any sense in the context of the game. Well, at least it gets the results that I want. Granted it undoes all the groundwork I previously did with diplomacy and bluff, but, hey, it's the only way I get to actually drive the campaign and not be led around by the nose by the DM.</p><p></p><p>If your players prefer your way, then, hey, more power to you. To me, and to most of the players I've played with, when they succeed, they actually want to succeed. They don't want the DM turning their successes into failures so that they can "earn" their successes.</p><p></p><p>Do you do the same thing in combat? When the character hits the target, do you then rule that he actually missed because, well, your opponent is just to fast to be hit by such a slow weapon as a maul? I doubt it. So, why are you interpreting successes out of combat in such a way that they fail?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Umm, where did this come from? I never said that the players determine DC's. I don't think anyone else did either. The only thing that I said is that once you, the DM, have set the DC and I, the player, have beaten that DC, don't take that success and spin it into a failure.</p><p></p><p>It might even be that a given choice of action really is impossible. That's fine. At that point, we actually agree LostSoul - don't roll the dice. Or, at least tell the players what's going on. Don't just say, "Hey, I know you just got a really high number on that roll and you know (because you're not a new player) that you succeeded, but, for some reason you fail."</p><p></p><p>And then sit back and expect the players to start pixel bitching their way into reading your mind as to why they failed.</p><p></p><p>But, no, at no point do the players get to determine DC's. Although, typically, the DC's will at least be ballparkable by the players if they have any experience with the system.</p><p></p><p>The bottom line is, if the players <u>actually</u> succeed, LET THEM SUCCEED. Blocking success is frustrating to the players, breaks all immersion and leads to your players giving up on trying things that are not so basic simple that the DM cannot block the success.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5611561, member: 22779"] So, what's the point of bluffing then? If all a bluff does is make someone believe something, but, has zero influence over what they actually do about that belief, then what's the point? Great! I succeeded in my bluff. He believes me. Now, I can actually make the next roll that might actually matter. Oh, wait... that roll didn't matter either since diplomacy doesn't actually make anyone do anything, it only influences reaction... I guess I'll do Intimidate. But, that doesn't make any sense in the context of the game. Well, at least it gets the results that I want. Granted it undoes all the groundwork I previously did with diplomacy and bluff, but, hey, it's the only way I get to actually drive the campaign and not be led around by the nose by the DM. If your players prefer your way, then, hey, more power to you. To me, and to most of the players I've played with, when they succeed, they actually want to succeed. They don't want the DM turning their successes into failures so that they can "earn" their successes. Do you do the same thing in combat? When the character hits the target, do you then rule that he actually missed because, well, your opponent is just to fast to be hit by such a slow weapon as a maul? I doubt it. So, why are you interpreting successes out of combat in such a way that they fail? Umm, where did this come from? I never said that the players determine DC's. I don't think anyone else did either. The only thing that I said is that once you, the DM, have set the DC and I, the player, have beaten that DC, don't take that success and spin it into a failure. It might even be that a given choice of action really is impossible. That's fine. At that point, we actually agree LostSoul - don't roll the dice. Or, at least tell the players what's going on. Don't just say, "Hey, I know you just got a really high number on that roll and you know (because you're not a new player) that you succeeded, but, for some reason you fail." And then sit back and expect the players to start pixel bitching their way into reading your mind as to why they failed. But, no, at no point do the players get to determine DC's. Although, typically, the DC's will at least be ballparkable by the players if they have any experience with the system. The bottom line is, if the players [u]actually[/u] succeed, LET THEM SUCCEED. Blocking success is frustrating to the players, breaks all immersion and leads to your players giving up on trying things that are not so basic simple that the DM cannot block the success. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Are things like Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy too easy?
Top