Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Do the initiative rules discourage parley?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="D+1" data-source="post: 2213938" data-attributes="member: 13654"><p>The players CANNOT affect surprise. Surprise is determined by the DM - is one side of the potential combat aware of the other when the other is not? If players obtain surprise but never consider anything but attack when they have it - that isn't the rules, it's the players. The hard rules of combat do not dictate to the players that they SHOULDN'T ever roleplay an encounter if they start out with a tactical advantage by choosing dumb, brute force instead. The rules only confer the tactical advantage - the players are UTTERLY responsible for how they choose to use it.</p><p></p><p>Players who never parley at the outset of an encounter are either bad or unwilling roleplayers, probably trained to be so by a DM who never has NPC's parley instead of attack and/or never confers any advantage or useful outcome to the PC's when they try parley.</p><p>Only you would know. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink - but are you actually leading them to water or a dry well?</p><p></p><p>Part of it is that you need to give strong indications that talk might be better than mindless violence or the PC's DON'T have a reason to sacrifice tactical advantage. When they DO try to talk first you can't just repeatedly have it degenerate to a fight ANYWAY or you're only teaching them that trying it is a waste of time. If they are already addicted to first-blood tactics then you have a job on your hands training them to merely SOMETIMES take a different approach.</p><p></p><p>The way to do that is to start throwing encounters at them where there is just NO WAY to handle it by blunt force. The initial choice to try talking has to be rock-obvious (and even then they might keep trying force out of sheer habit). After you have them trained to react appropriately to encounters with a talk-only arrangement then give them a choice of non-combat options. Talk to it or sneak past it. Talk to it or get someone else to fight it. Then add encounters where the opponents will start to fight but quickly and frantically try to parley. And so forth.</p><p></p><p>Eventually you should be able to get yourself and your players trained to consider the possibility of non-combat options, and to offer clues about/recognize those opportunities when they arise.</p><p></p><p>But you notice that none of that is a matter of RULES manipulation... It's all roleplaying.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="D+1, post: 2213938, member: 13654"] The players CANNOT affect surprise. Surprise is determined by the DM - is one side of the potential combat aware of the other when the other is not? If players obtain surprise but never consider anything but attack when they have it - that isn't the rules, it's the players. The hard rules of combat do not dictate to the players that they SHOULDN'T ever roleplay an encounter if they start out with a tactical advantage by choosing dumb, brute force instead. The rules only confer the tactical advantage - the players are UTTERLY responsible for how they choose to use it. Players who never parley at the outset of an encounter are either bad or unwilling roleplayers, probably trained to be so by a DM who never has NPC's parley instead of attack and/or never confers any advantage or useful outcome to the PC's when they try parley. Only you would know. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink - but are you actually leading them to water or a dry well? Part of it is that you need to give strong indications that talk might be better than mindless violence or the PC's DON'T have a reason to sacrifice tactical advantage. When they DO try to talk first you can't just repeatedly have it degenerate to a fight ANYWAY or you're only teaching them that trying it is a waste of time. If they are already addicted to first-blood tactics then you have a job on your hands training them to merely SOMETIMES take a different approach. The way to do that is to start throwing encounters at them where there is just NO WAY to handle it by blunt force. The initial choice to try talking has to be rock-obvious (and even then they might keep trying force out of sheer habit). After you have them trained to react appropriately to encounters with a talk-only arrangement then give them a choice of non-combat options. Talk to it or sneak past it. Talk to it or get someone else to fight it. Then add encounters where the opponents will start to fight but quickly and frantically try to parley. And so forth. Eventually you should be able to get yourself and your players trained to consider the possibility of non-combat options, and to offer clues about/recognize those opportunities when they arise. But you notice that none of that is a matter of RULES manipulation... It's all roleplaying. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Do the initiative rules discourage parley?
Top