Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="p_johnston" data-source="post: 8269628" data-attributes="member: 7016849">So as to the first question the implementation is not meant to insure the party always has a huge bonus to persuasion. It's meant to make it so that when both the Fighter and the Bard are present the Fighter's Player doesn't feel they aren't allowed to be the one talking because they have no bonus. As to the second question while having the NPC only willing to talk to a particular character can work in a specific scenario if it happens to often then it's just he DM taking away the Parties choice of who gets to roleplay which is the exact opposite of what I want.As to the second point this is actually something I do a fair amount to try and encourage Players to think and try and use skills in more fun ways. That being said the vast majority of the time a Character is going to have the skills associated with their main attribute. While the Wizard may use a logical argument which allows the use of intelligence they are unlikely to have Persuasion so its usually going to be just an Ability Modifier. In which case a Bard with Expertise is still going to be better then them based solely on proficiency.Edit: To clarify they only get the Bonus if the character who has that bonus is present in the scene. I added an edit to make that more clear</blockquote>