Bargaining and debate

[herrozerro]

Just a quick question.

Are these goals chosen to be rolled against?

Edit: Also You have DCs but no skills, did you only use diplomacy? or allow other skills as well?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Yes, the players decide which goal to pursue {roll against} and can concede points on other goals as a means to gain on the selected one.

My intent with this system was to put choices in the hands of the players, and have those choices shape the adventure path. They told Lord Shaladel who took the Torch as part of the deal regarding the freedom of Gates Pass, so now if they try to recover the Torch they will have competition....
But Gate's pass won't become a vassal state to the Shahalestian Empire.


No, I didn't specify a skill because that depends on the players approach. Mechanically it is the same DC, but use of bluff or intimidate might backfire... or possibly be advantageous. PCs could use Insight to see what the best approach would be.
Technically you can use pretty much any other skill as well, as long as the roleplaying pitch supports it. Lord Shaladel is enamored with history, so a knowledge history could allow you to refer to similar times in the past that went the way you prefer... gaining successes.


In negotiations with a stereotypical barbarian, using intimidate is what he expects and he might start to dislike the PCs for 'talking sweet'. This would reflect in him pushing to close the negotiation early or possibly even shift attitude down a notch to neutral {if friendly} or hostile {if neutral}

 

[herrozerro]

Alright just one more clarification.

In your example with the Domo a player did a good roleplaying that included both intimidate and bluff. So you said that the player could roll both skills at a 3 die advantage.

Couldnt that be gamed a bit? All you would have to do is include all three kinds of speech in your description and then you could roll 3 skills at a 3 die advantage for a total of 9 dice?

"grrrr, lets us in(Intimidate), my father the duke will hear about you if you dont let us in(Bluff), Though I can forget all about this if you forget the whole thing ever happened(Diplomacy)."

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

The main push in that is bluff, so this would be a check against that. If the player wanted to push the intimidate side as well, that would be a different check.

After working with this system, it really works best when there are multiple goals so the player has to make a choice between which goals to push for. Having only one goal doesnkt deepen the mechanic.

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[herrozerro]

The main push in that is bluff, so this would be a check against that. If the player wanted to push the intimidate side as well, that would be a different check.

After working with this system, it really works best when there are multiple goals so the player has to make a choice between which goals to push for. Having only one goal doesnkt deepen the mechanic.

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

Alright, I understand now I think. Its just your earlier example it seemed like if you granted another check they would get double the dice with some creative wording.