Diplomacy and Bartering?

[Deadguy]

I wouldn't personally use opposed PC vs NPC Diplomacy rules to set the price (even though according to RAW you're supposed to use opposed rolls for negotiation) - that implies the PC is happy with the high price because of the merchant's persuasivesness, which takes away player autonomy.

Well, I'd assume that the ro9ll determines what the offered price is. It doesn't mean that the PC has to buy at that price - that's up to the player. It's just that if he isn't happy with it, well, tough, the deal fell through. Just as happens in real life.

I use Diplomacy to handle negotiation of price. It's opposed by the merchant's Profession (Business) skill - a skill I use to represent the business nous of an artisan. It seems to work okay. The trick is to work out what's the lowest price the artisan will sell for, or the highest price he can pay. This avoids silliness like +1 vorpal swords selling for 1000 g.p., irrespective of the roll.

 

[S'mon]

IMC if the merchant is selling second-hand goods then he probably bought at 50%; if he's selling new stuff then he bought at 100% from the maker, so those would be minimums. Generally therefore it's better to buy from the manufacturer or commission magic items from the Wizard directly.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Complete Adventurer does indeed have rules explicitly for bartering. It's under the Skills section of the book.

 

[Pielorinho]

Things to consider:
-A successful merchant in magical goods is accustomed to making favorable deals with powerful adventurers.
-That successful merchant is probably an expert in the field, with several levels. (I'd say the merchant gains XP through making favorable deals).
-That merchant probably has maxed out diplomacy, sense motive, appraise, and bluff.
-That merchant probably has skill focus: diplomacy (and possibly several other skill focus feats).

The negotiation on a price should have several stages:
1) The presentation of the item, along with statements about its value. (The seller makes a diplomacy check, or a bluff check if they're trying to gloss over imperfections).
2) The buyer of the item tries to determine the item's value. (In most cases, this would be with an appraise check; I would probably allow an appraise check to oppose the seller's bluff check).
3) The buyer of the item then states his conclusion about the item's value (another diplomacy/bluff check).
4) The seller of the item tries to figure out whether that's a fair value (another appraise check).
5) Haggling begins.

Obviously, that's way too complicated; but I think it points to the skills that are going to be involved. And I think it points to the idea that PCs may sometimes find themselves happily making a purchase at a value substantial higher than bluebook value, or selling at substantially less than bluebook value, because a canny merchant has convinced them it's a good bargain.

If a player wants to haggle over prices, I'd make it clear that bluebook values no longer hold true: otherwise, they're going to game the system, which is no good.

Daniel

 

[Hammerhead]

Somtimes. Other times there's no haggling, specifically one magical items merchant with whom most of the PCs intereracted. He had a sign that he would point to whenever some overly charismatic adventurer tried to get a better price. As a merchant, I'd implement a strict policy about such interactions and never deviate from it unless I was really confident about my negotiation skills.

 

[Pielorinho]

Somtimes. Other times there's no haggling, specifically one magical items merchant with whom most of the PCs intereracted. He had a sign that he would point to whenever some overly charismatic adventurer tried to get a better price. As a merchant, I'd implement a strict policy about such interactions and never deviate from it unless I was really confident about my negotiation skills.

True. Merchants will be in four categories:

1) Bad Hagglers. These will be anyone who's worse at haggling than the average person they deal with. For merchants of powerful magic items, they'll mostly be dealing with sorcerers, paladins, rogues, and bards--and for them to stay in business, they need to get the better end of the deal most of the time. The ones that don't do so, the bad hagglers, go out of business pretty quickly. This is therefore the rarest group; PCs who encounter one should rejoice at their good fortune .
2) Good Hagglers. These are the ones who can, on average, out-haggle their primary clients (high-level PCs). They needn't fear some high-charisma schmoe with high diplomacy skills, because that's what these merchants are. They spend their whole lives haggling, and are only too delighted to haggle with some rube fresh from the dungeon who thinks a few ranks in diplomacy means they're the next Mr. Popeil. These guys are pretty common, and wise adventurers know that entering their shop is a gamble, and that odds always favor the house. However, shopping at a good haggler's store is always a delight: they may sit you down with a bottle of exquisite elven wine, fill you in on the city's best gossip, set you up for a night at their palatial estate, and get you invited to the Duke's masquerade ball, all in the process of fleecing you for every copper piece. Remember that these are merchants who cater to the VERY wealthy, and they want to keep you on their good side.
3) Tough-but-fair. These guys aren't good at haggling, but they know what things are worth. They stay in business by charging reasonable prices and by not being swayed by fancy words. PCs who don't want to gamble are advised to go here.
4) Tough-but-unfair. These guys think they're tough-but-fair, but they set prices poorly. If they set them too low, they go under quickly (see #1); if they set them too high, they also go under quickly (since nobody visits them). They're therefore the rarest of all groups.

A medium-sized town is lucky to have one magic-item vendor, who could fall into any of the four categories; a metropolis might have multiple representatives of each category.

Daniel

 

[Philip]

He thought he was being 'punished for trying to roleplay' or something, which wasn't my intention.

As an aside: did this role-playing come down to the diplomacy roll only? Because I can imagine that if he put effort into haggling out the encounter, he does not want to end up with the same average price that others end up with. Book price is for those who don't want to put in the effort IMO.

If he just ROLL-played the diplomacy check and then complained, well, serves him right. If you let it come down to the dice only, you might come out ahead or behind.

If he complained about putting ranks into Diplomacy and not getting any use out of them, that's another matter entirely.

 

[Ninja-to]

As an aside: did this role-playing come down to the diplomacy roll only? Because I can imagine that if he put effort into haggling out the encounter, he does not want to end up with the same average price that others end up with. Book price is for those who don't want to put in the effort IMO.

If he just ROLL-played the diplomacy check and then complained, well, serves him right. If you let it come down to the dice only, you might come out ahead or behind.

If he complained about putting ranks into Diplomacy and not getting any use out of them, that's another matter entirely.

There was no roleplaying, just a quick dice roll. I did say beforehand 'if you screw up' but he thought that because he only missed the roll by 1 (I told him the DC he needed to beat, which was my mistake I think) he complained and said he shouldn't have to pay more, because it wasn't such a large failure. I actually thought a 10% markup wasn't all that bad, but it *was* an expensive item I suppose (5,000 gp for a 10th level PC). Anyway, I'm tending to think that my ruling wasn't so bad, and I think he should have bitten the bullet a bit. Like someone said earlier, it's not like he was forced to buy the item.

He used his Diplomacy a LOT recently when he was caught terrorizing a local Inn and tried to talk his way out of it. I use Diplomacy checks fairly often to sway NPC attitudes, and what the player actually *says* adds or takes away from their chances. But now that you mention it, I think the player complained and said 'When do we ever use Dimplomacy?", so maybe I should have reminded him that his Diplomacy and his friend's Diplomacy checks (his weren't good enough to get him out) are why his PC isn't locked in a jail below the city for the rest if his life...

 

[Jacen]

Rant and hijack...

Warning: I read my message and it feels almost like flamebait even for me . I know that there is only one side pointed out, but just wanted to REALLY point that out.

If he just ROLL-played the diplomacy check and then complained, well, serves him right. If you let it come down to the dice only, you might come out ahead or behind.

<SARCASM>OK. If orc is running for me I wait in Porta di Ferro Mezana, then Fendentte Mezano - Posta di Fenestra through Mezano Roverso back to Posta di Fenestra and finish with point of the blade to eye. How much bonus to attack roll???? Hey I did roleplay that why don't I get any bonus??? That was sooooo coooolll blade handling. Hey what about bringing longsword to next game and I can show what I do. Wouldn't that be cool ROLEplaying.</SARCASM>

For me rolling is role playing too. I have played characters that were smarter than Einstain, more charistmatic than anything from MM, stronger than human can be and yet I didn't have to do things in real life. So why should I talk and impress DM to play charistmatic and diplomatic character? My imagination about good and cool "role"playing might not be same with DM - what if he thinks that that was lousy talk that won't help and maybe even gives minuses to ROLL. I am not the character I am playing thus the name roleplaying - be it dice or talk it is roleplaying. If you think dices are ROLLpalying then go and play storytelling or LARP but do not say that I am not roleplaying when I usually prefer just rolling dieces in some situation.

If he complained about putting ranks into Diplomacy and not getting any use out of them, that's another matter entirely.

<SARCASM>Why to put ranks on social skills because you can just "ROLE"play it? Or why not use charisma as a dump stat - hey you can just "ROLE"play it.</SARCASM>

So as a point line. Pointing out that HE JUST ROLLS feels like discriminating. Pheeewww... Now that is said. Now I can continue and let the pressure increase next ten years listening about how some ppl are bad roleplayer - they just rollplay.

 

[S'mon]

Jacen - as GM I certainly do give bonuses to combat rolls for good description of combat maneuvers (plausible, cool, or both) just as I give bonuses to Diplomacy for good roleplay. It mostly comes up in PBEMs where there's more time to think about these things, but I find it's always good to reward such things - typically +2 on a roll. Albeit your sarcasm bit was meaningless to me so I don't know if it was cool or not...