Diplomacy on PC's

[Trainz]

A friend of mine on a mailing list had this question:

===============================================
"Advise please - in 3.x, can Diplomacy be used by one PC to cause another PC to do what they want?
In the online game I started playing in today, a one-off character with a Cha of 20 (though she wasn't being played like it - a thorough-going little princess-complex she had) *obliged* my character by force of "persuasion" to get someone to carry her because she said she was tired. I'm not aware that an exceptionally high Charisma is licence to behave like a bitch and still mysteriously have people want to do what you say anyway - esp. not PCs.

Aside from the words "others (non-player characters)" in the 3.5 Diplomacy description, is there somewhere where it states clearly that PCs can't be coerced in this way? Thought it was expressed more clearly somewhere - perhaps in the DMG? (Mine has temporarily grown legs, seeing I've had no use for it for so long.) Your views?"
=============================================

Can you guys give feedback on this with page references please ?

 

[daTim]

Im not sure if it says anywhere in the PHB that it cannot be used on PC's, but in the Diplomacy skill description it only says that it can be used on NPCs.

In the DMG page 128 under NPC Attitudes, it says that "NPCs can never influence PC attitudes. The players always make their characters' decisions" So I would expect that would carry over to PC vs PC.

 

[Trainz]

Great, that's what I think my friend was refering to.

Thanks !

 

[Lord Pendragon]

daTim has it exactly right. I also tend to adjust NPC attitude based on the PC's attitude, as well. So if the PC is being a snot, an NPC's attitude might shift from Indifferent to Unfriendly, or even Hostile depending on how bad the PCs attitude got. Granted, a high-charisma PC could still manage to get the NPC back to Indifferent or better with some good rolls, but the more of a jerk the PC is, the harder it's going to be to stay in NPCs' good graces, high charisma or not.

 

[Al]

Whilst the DM cannot *force* any PC to react to any social skill, I would regard it as poor roleplaying if the PC were to point-blank refuse to acknowledge any Diplomacy check, Bluff check, Intimidate check etc. There may be reasonable in-game reasons why the PC would refuse it: for example, in a climactic battle if the villain (who has just slain three of your comrades) begs to call it quits, it's reasonable for a PC to be so adrenaline-pumped and furious to ignore it. However, in an ordinary social situation it would be odd for a PC to totally ignore Diplomacy altogether.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Whilst the DM cannot *force* any PC to react to any social skill, I would regard it as poor roleplaying if the PC were to point-blank refuse to acknowledge any Diplomacy check, Bluff check, Intimidate check etc. There may be reasonable in-game reasons why the PC would refuse it: for example, in a climactic battle if the villain (who has just slain three of your comrades) begs to call it quits, it's reasonable for a PC to be so adrenaline-pumped and furious to ignore it. However, in an ordinary social situation it would be odd for a PC to totally ignore Diplomacy altogether.

I can only agree with that if the character is actually roleplaying diplomacy. I have no patience as a player or DM for players who think a stat or roll will magically negate the way their character is behaving.

My personal take on charisma is that it indicates force of personality - not likeability as much as noticability. A high strength character still has to apply it properly to get good results, and I see mental stats the same way. So if the high cha character is being played as a annoying twit, you find her a REALLY annoying twit... like her annoyingness drills into your skull and cannot be ignored. Her high charisma is making her social behaviour more effective - in this case, it is very effectively driving down your opinion of her. The fact that she has caused this shift in attitude then gives her very straightforward negitives to any skill check to turn around and try to reverse it... Her first attempt to diplomacy you will seem like the height of arrogance and ego.

(in the same way, a low cha character who is played as a really nice guy will get pretty good responses... once people notice him. )

kahuna burger

 

[MerakSpielman]

There are some occasions that the NPC's social skills come into play.

Arguing: opposed Diplomacy checks
NPC is lying and the PC wants to know if their character can tell: Bluff vs. Sense Motive.

etc...

I generally don't see much PCs trying cha-based skills on other PCs. If she insisted on it, I might let you both roll opposed Diplomacy checks, with modifiers.....

But still, it's no fun having your character do things you don't want them to do - and without magical influence yet!

 

[BeauNiddle]

I can only agree with that if the character is actually roleplaying diplomacy. I have no patience as a player or DM for players who think a stat or roll will magically negate the way their character is behaving.

My personal take on charisma is that it indicates force of personality - not likeability as much as noticability. A high strength character still has to apply it properly to get good results, and I see mental stats the same way. So if the high cha character is being played as a annoying twit, you find her a REALLY annoying twit... like her annoyingness drills into your skull and cannot be ignored. Her high charisma is making her social behaviour more effective - in this case, it is very effectively driving down your opinion of her. The fact that she has caused this shift in attitude then gives her very straightforward negitives to any skill check to turn around and try to reverse it... Her first attempt to diplomacy you will seem like the height of arrogance and ego.

(in the same way, a low cha character who is played as a really nice guy will get pretty good responses... once people notice him. )

kahuna burger

Speaking as a low charisma player I would say be careful implementing this. Her high Charisma and diplomacy skills mean she's such a 'little darling' that people will help her even if she is being technically rude.

By all means, penalise my Diplomacy roll if I'm role-playing it badly - just don't negate all the points I spent on that skill.

[no I'm not the player involved I'm just standing up for the Shy huddled masses]

 

[jgsugden]

High diplomacy skills should not be ignored by two interacting PCs, but conversation should not be reduced to die rolls either.

The problem that we run into is that some *players* have ... very ... low ... charisma scores. Their characters may be very charismatic, but the players tend to act awkwardly, rudely or meanly. If the player doesn't know how to act nice, it is hard for them to roleplay a nice character.

When the uncharismatic player tries to have their charismatic character do something rude or inappropriate, you have to rely upon the dice a bit to figure out how other characters would see it.

I'd figure out what relationship the PCs share. Is it unfriendly, indifferent, friendly or helpful? Then I would modify this relationship negatively if the requested action is offensive, rude or extremely awkward. Generally, if the request would tick me off, I apply this penalty. In the current example, I'd probably move the starting block for the diplomacy check down one level towards hostile.

Then, I'd have the 'princess' character roll a diplomacy check and check it against the 'Influencing NPC Attitudes' table.

If the result was 'friendly' or 'helpful', I'd tell the target player something along the lines of "The Princess does look very tired. Even though her request is a bit rude, you're surprised to find yourself feeling sorry for her. Can you think of anything that will help her tired feet?"

If the result was 'indifferent', I'd probably tell the target player, 'The princess is making more of her demands, but you're not particularly moved by them.'

If the result was 'unfriendly', I'd probably tell the target player, 'The princess is making demands of you. It is really getting under your skin.'

If the result was 'hostile', I'd probably tell the target player, 'That whiny princess had the audacity to demand that you carry her around. That demand was the straw that broke the camel's back. You've lost your cool. Do you storm off angrily, yell at her or attack her?'

 

[Lord Pendragon]

If the result was 'friendly' or 'helpful', I'd tell the target player something along the lines of "The Princess does look very tired. Even though her request is a bit rude, you're surprised to find yourself feeling sorry for her. Can you think of anything that will help her tired feet?"

I'd be careful of this kind of DMing. I know that I, as a player, would never stand for a DM that told me who my character feels sorry for. It'd be an issue I would leave a game over. If your players are okay with this, or if you don't mind losing players, then that's fantastic. But just be aware that there are players out there who take exception to DMs who feel they can override a player's role-playing decisions.

IMO, the note in the DMG about players always deciding how their characters react is there for a reason.