Diplomacy skill and adventure design.

[DonTadow]

The only bonus to roleplaying should be a furthering of the story, increased experience, or opportunities for character advancement in a personal sense. Adding bonuses or negatives to a Diplomacy roll through that method is penalizing or rewarding players based on their own social skills, not their characters.

It is precisely the same as giving bonuses to a player who can pull out a Kendo blade and demonstrate the exact manuevers his Iaijutsu Master is using to decapitate the feared Ogre Lord.

The question I have is, would you reward more the charismatic, personable player who gave a brilliant, well thought out and insightful diplomatic introduction the king, with his Charisma 11, Diplomacy +4 character, or the same player who took a more reserved, basic tact that better represents his characters actual skills?

Not if you give out rewards for effort. Heck if a guy camed dressed as samurai i'd give him some extra xp.

Good role playing should be awarded. And don't give me the actor in the party argument. I got two actors, and two ho hum rpgers. They usually get the same amount of bonuses because of the effort and thought they put in.

 

[Cosmic.Justice]

But what defines "good" roleplaying? Taking a more reserved, taciturn approach to social interactions is, in many characters cases, a highly accurate rendition of how said character would act. Yet how many DMs are willing to recognize this and reward a player for taking that approach, rather than a proactive socially dominant position that may not reflect the predisposition of the character in question?

Furthermore, I simply do not see why social skills should be an exception to the general rule that out of game knowledge and skill, does not translate to in game knowledge and skill.

 

[DonTadow]

But what defines "good" roleplaying? Taking a more reserved, taciturn approach to social interactions is, in many characters cases, a highly accurate rendition of how said character would act. Yet how many DMs are willing to recognize this and reward a player for taking that approach, rather than a proactive socially dominant position that may not reflect the predisposition of the character in question?

Furthermore, I simply do not see why social skills should be an exception to the general rule that out of game knowledge and skill, does not translate to in game knowledge and skill.

You can't define it but you know its there if you got a sense for it. A well placed plan, a moment when the pc stays in charachter when most wouldn't, a funny moment, a heroic action.. its hard to explain.

I agree there aren't a lot of DMs whom I'd even want to reward roelplaying because they only think of roleplaying as one type of thing. I've rewarded the player whom stood silent while she had information that could help the party, yet her charachter would never divulge it. Again you just got to have a knack for it.

My thing is if you get points for monpolies in monopoly, and spades in spades, you should get points for roleplaying in a roleplaying game.

 

[Cosmic.Justice]

I can understand that point of view, but insofar as I'm concerned, roleplaying should be a reward unto itself, not something you have to bribe or force players into. I do not want to force players to roleplay every action of a charismatic PC in order to get the full benefits of that type of PC.

If the statistics and skills say the character can do it, I'm not going to demand a rendition of the actions the character is taking by the player. If said player wants to roleplay it, great, but if not, I let the dice fall where they may, take the final result and apply my imagination as to how said character got the job done.

 

[BRP2]

A system I've never put into play, but I always thought about was using Diplomacy as some point was kind of rank setting some sort of guidelines. This would only be in a case that would truly be considered Diplomacy, not just trying to leave a good impression.

Something like:

All rolling is done outside the player's sight.

Diplomacy check. DC = Target's Sense Motive or Diplomacy check, whatever receives the highest bonus(may it be modifier vs modifier or rank vs rank). In situations where both characters involved are trying to gain something, Diplomacy check is always used.

Just as always, the target's mood plays a big role. Doesn't always have to be "hostile", but "extremely opposed" to anything the player would suggest, sort of like trying to be a diplomat between two nations at war, more than likely, the person representing his nation won't attack the other, but can still be impossible to sway.

Depending on the results, the player is given a list of facts about the character and clues on what he wants. Basically info on what options would be best to take. If failed, the player still receives information... but it's information that would give bad enough to take.

Role-playing happens.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

then I ask them to role play out the encounter, in either 1st or 3rd person
add a +/- 5 for tactics, then hae them role, with both sucess and fail options possible.

We do it the opposite way. Roll the dice on any social skills the character may possess. Then roleplay out that outcome.

For instance... Diplomacy roll = 1. Interaction occurs something along the lines of, "I like french fried potatoes." or, "I see that you have braces. I, too, have braces. Come to Butthead."

Or... Diplomacy roll = 20. "Friends, Romans, Countrymen!" or, "Ich ben ein Berliner!"

Rewards are given when somebody tries to do something daring or cool, like, "I'm going to try to talk the baroness out of her knickers." "Ok... Here's an action point, go to it!" And bonuses are granted for character actions, like bribery, proffering gifts, or being really sincere about what you're after.

Later
silver

 

[mosaic]

Diplomacy should be a viable way to overcome obstacles and resolve conflicts regardless of the player's role-playing ability. Diplomacy is a mechanical skill in the game. It should be treated that way.

Furthermore, I simply do not see why social skills should be an exception to the general rule that out of game knowledge and skill, does not translate to in game knowledge and skill.

i agree strongly.

 

[DonTadow]

We do it the opposite way. Roll the dice on any social skills the character may possess. Then roleplay out that outcome.

For instance... Diplomacy roll = 1. Interaction occurs something along the lines of, "I like french fried potatoes." or, "I see that you have braces. I, too, have braces. Come to Butthead."

Or... Diplomacy roll = 20. "Friends, Romans, Countrymen!" or, "Ich ben ein Berliner!"

Rewards are given when somebody tries to do something daring or cool, like, "I'm going to try to talk the baroness out of her knickers." "Ok... Here's an action point, go to it!" And bonuses are granted for character actions, like bribery, proffering gifts, or being really sincere about what you're after.

Later
silver

This is where i flop and jump to the other side of the fence. When you require a certain type of roleplaying-then you start bordering on acting and moving into unbelivablity. It is perfectly viable for someone to say agood speech or not say the exact right thing and get the opposite effect of what they intended.

 

[DonTadow]

i agree strongly.

But your out of game knowledge applies to everything you do in the game.

roleplaying = tactical skills.

Choosing whether your fighter uses the dagger or the sword is a tactical decision that depends on the player not the charachter.

Whether a pc goes left or right depends on the player not the character.

Picking which spell is going to do the most damage on coordinate 33,22 is a player decision not the character decision. That's player knowledge.

That is why the argument of "well why use my skills" does not fly in d and d. You use them regardless. Oddly enough why is it social skills the only place that most players want to deviate from the norm by NOT role playing.

 

[shilsen]

But your out of game knowledge applies to everything you do in the game.

For some players, maybe. Not all of them.

roleplaying = tactical skills.

When I run my characters, I don't run them as having the same degree of tactical skill. Some are better and some are worse tacticians, depending on the individual PC. I'm applying IC knowledge there, not OOC knowledge.

I had an orc barbarian of mine with 6 Int & Wis try to grapple an allip, which was something he'd never fought and knew nothing about, because his weapons weren't hurting it and he lost his head. Would my 16 Wis paladin with especial knowledge of the undead have done the same? Nope.

Choosing whether your fighter uses the dagger or the sword is a tactical decision that depends on the player not the charachter.

For you, perhaps. For me, it depends on the character's preferences (which may not be the most mechanically beneficial one), background, training, etc.

Whether a pc goes left or right depends on the player not the character.

Again, you're presuming. For me, it depends on the character as much as, if not more than, on the player.

Picking which spell is going to do the most damage on coordinate 33,22 is a player decision not the character decision. That's player knowledge.

Nope. If the character isn't aware of that information and making that judgement call, how does one justify using the spell? I've had my PCs use sub-optimal spells, like someone use a fire spell on a creature immune to heat because the character didn't know it, even though I, the player, did.

That is why the argument of "well why use my skills" does not fly in d and d. You use them regardless. Oddly enough why is it social skills the only place that most players want to deviate from the norm by NOT role playing.

As I stated above, I don't "use them regardless." I think it's safe to say that I'm hardly the only one to do so.

When it comes to social interaction, as a personal preference, I prefer to personally roleplay out my character's responses, but count on the rolls to decide how successful the attempt is (preferably with a +2 to -2 modifier based on the quality of the roleplayed response). But that doesn't mean I think someone just rolling the dice is not roleplaying. They're just doing a slightly different version than me.