Diplomacy: A game-wrecker?

[qstor]

From Diplomacy (Cha) (Pathfinder_OGC)

"Some requests automatically fail if the request goes against the creature’s values or its nature, subject to GM discretion."

I think this goes a long way to saying the bard character with the +20 Diplomacy modifier can't stop the chaotic evil assassin from killing him out right.

You're the DM its your final call.

Mike

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

So how does that "Living"-type campaign Pathfinder Society deal with Diplomacy?

Can a PS DM just use his own chart modifiers? Require players become modest thespians? Jump through hoops?

 

[Anguish]

So how does that "Living"-type campaign Pathfinder Society deal with Diplomacy?

Can a PS DM just use his own chart modifiers? Require players become modest thespians? Jump through hoops?

I suspect they treat it like a Climb check.

Player: "My character climbs."
DM: "How? You're in the middle of an open field."
Player: "Um... I... um... but I've got a +40 in climb!"
DM: "You try to climb the air, fall down, and I'll take a Reflex save to see if you end up prone."

Player: "My character uses Diplomacy on the merchant."
DM: "How? He hasn't spoken a word yet and you don't know anything about him."
Player: "Um, I... um... tell him he's got a pleasant nose. And his shop smells only slightly like feces, which is remarkable for this town. I've got +40 in Diplomacy!"
DM: "Well, he was friendly to you, but now he's not so sure, and realizes you're a manipulative foreigner."

Skill checks don't always succeed. I'd allow a player to make an Int check to solve a puzzle or riddle if the character is high-Int. Ability checks are different. But skill checks... should come with plausible application. "How" is the ultimate question. Sure, some are no-brainers, such as Jumping over a chasm. But again that's got plausibility and is obvious.

 

[LostSoul]

Nothing in the Diplomacy skill asks you to say what your PC is saying. You can resolve the action ("I improve his attitude") just fine without any RP. It should come as no surprise that people use it that way.

If you want to make sure you avoid that kind of play you have to change the way the skill check works. Make what the PC says a required step in the resolution of the skill check.

 

[Nedz]

"Diplomacy Check, why I've never heard of that bank. Besides I only take cash"
This is the old roll play against role play debate.
I'm still not entirely sold on these skills, but certainly the players should role play their characters in such a manner that it supports their skill selections.

This won't help you if your players are of the "Action" type, ie they get bored talking to NPCs and just want to get on with the game.

On interesting rule varient we use is to say that a 1 rolled on a skill check equals -19 and a re roll, similiarly a 20 = +19 and a re-roll. This can open-end. This means there is always a risk of the diplomacy roll going very bad.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Nothing in the Diplomacy skill asks you to say what your PC is saying. You can resolve the action ("I improve his attitude") just fine without any RP. It should come as no surprise that people use it that way.

If you want to make sure you avoid that kind of play you have to change the way the skill check works. Make what the PC says a required step in the resolution of the skill check.

Exactly. I do some things better than any character I have ever made does and my characters do lots of things I could never do nearly as well. I had a character with a +18 diplomacy. I have no idea what he would say or do to get reactions like that with anyone he talks to. I can make vague statements. "I want to improve the dwarfs opinion of my elf and stop associating me with all the other elves he hates because he is a racist". Yeah I would have no idea on that one. A +18 diplomacy can do that. Me? I tell the racist to F-off and consider hitting him over the head with the sword I am carrying.

 

[Celebrim]

Back when I was still teaching, I'd get complaints from parents about their kids and their kids' sense of entitlement. My advice to you is the same as it was to them.

Say, "No."

"I buy [magic item]."

Say, "No."

"Diplomacy check. I got X total to improve his mood."

Say, "No."

When a player starts to catch on, switch your answer.

"Greetings," says the player. "What I fine establishment you have here! I've not seen an inventory quite this diverse in a while. Tell me your secret, please."

"The shopkeeper says," replies DM. "'Thank you, good sir. We do take pride in our work here.'"

Player asks, "Can I make a Diplomacy check to improve his mood?"

DM says, "Yes."

Rinse and repeat as needed.

I need to spread XP around before giving it to you again.

Sadly, this XP system seems unfairly biased against the sort that actually deserve it. It would be nice if I could give XP to whoever I wanted to, on the condition that I only had it to give away if I had recieved it from several people.

 

[Celebrim]

Exactly. I do some things better than any character I have ever made does and my characters do lots of things I could never do nearly as well. I had a character with a +18 diplomacy. I have no idea what he would say or do to get reactions like that with anyone he talks to.

You don't have to be charismatic to play a character with +18 diplomacy (though admittedly, it helps).

You do have to make a brave attempt at playing the character though, whether you are personally charismatic or not.

The dice is there to help me as the DM interpret what you do in the best possible light. It's isn't there to replace the role play itself.

I can make vague statements. "I want to improve the dwarfs opinion of my elf and stop associating me with all the other elves he hates because he is a racist. Yeah I would have no idea on that one."

At the very least you ought to try saying, "I'm not like the other elves. You'd like me if you'd get to know me. Maybe its time for you to show how noble you are and judge me for who I am, not for who your racisms tells you to believe I am."

No, maybe that's not a very good thing to say. I don't know. It's quite possible that you say that to the dwarf and he's insulted and pulls his axe on you. Or, maybe you force him to rethink his actions. I don't know.

And that is why we roll the dice. And, because your character has a +18 bonus to diplomacy, chances are your brave, bold, frank attempt is going to work at least a little. On the other hand, were you playing a character with a 4 charisma, chances are it won't work. But the important thing is that, either way, you the player make an attempt to role play it out, define the character, play the game, and interact with the game world.

Saying, "I want to make a diplomacy check to improve the dwarves mood" is interacting with the rules, and not the game world. If your proposition doesn't involve your character interacting with the dwarf, then I'm not required to respond to it as if it happens.

I tell the racist to F-off and consider hitting him over the head with the sword I am carrying.

And if that is how you choose to play your character, then it doesn't matter much what diplomacy skill you have. Nonetheless, it becomes who your character is. Your actions as a player define the character.

 

[billd91]

Exactly. I do some things better than any character I have ever made does and my characters do lots of things I could never do nearly as well. I had a character with a +18 diplomacy. I have no idea what he would say or do to get reactions like that with anyone he talks to. I can make vague statements. "I want to improve the dwarfs opinion of my elf and stop associating me with all the other elves he hates because he is a racist". Yeah I would have no idea on that one. A +18 diplomacy can do that. Me? I tell the racist to F-off and consider hitting him over the head with the sword I am carrying.

For players who have a difficult time with this sort of thing, not having a clue how to RP a good charisma or diplomacy skill, I'm content to ask them what sort of information they'll impart and what general approach they're taking. I require them to do something more than say "I use diplomacy on him" but it needn't be 1st person immersion acting or anything like that.

 

[Roman]

Exactly. I do some things better than any character I have ever made does and my characters do lots of things I could never do nearly as well. I had a character with a +18 diplomacy. I have no idea what he would say or do to get reactions like that with anyone he talks to. I can make vague statements. "I want to improve the dwarfs opinion of my elf and stop associating me with all the other elves he hates because he is a racist". Yeah I would have no idea on that one. A +18 diplomacy can do that. Me? I tell the racist to F-off and consider hitting him over the head with the sword I am carrying.

Celebrim said it well, but let me expand on it with a comparison.

You might not be as charismatic as your bard character, but neither will you be as tactically proficient as your experienced Fighter with 18/+4 in Intelligence and/or Wisdom. Does that mean that you shouldn't tell your DM what you are doing in combat and just roll a tactics roll and he will place your character in the most advantageous location and calculate for you whom to attack, who you flank and so on? I would contend that it wouldn't be much of a game if it were done that way. In a similar vein, the social skills are there to resolve social actions, but you still have to actually give some sort of indication what those social actions are - as in how is the diplomacy being used.

Of course, there is no one way to play the game and if players want to play a combat-only game that's fine - in that case the whole social skill system is somewaht redundant though.