Ending Combat Diplomatically?

[Lord Pendragon]

But yeah, I can definitely see my DMs just flat out telling me it wouldn't work, which is the sort of thing that always pisses me off. Don't tell me I can't, tell me it's ridiculously difficult and then let me try, dammit.

So what's the difference between telling you it won't work, and assigning it a DC of 300 and letting you roll?

Although I could see it happening in certain very specific circumstances (wronged laborer attacks his former boss, you--the boss' bodyguard--step in to convince the guy that he's going about it the wrong way, etc. etc.) I don't really think you can Diplomacy your way out of combat very often. The NPC Attitude charts are for NPCs who don't know you, and who meet you in the course of normal activity...at a tavern or the blacksmith's, etc. etc. Those people don't have any real reason to want to do you harm usually, so if you're diplomatic enough, you can warm them up to you, make friends, etc. But if you're in combat, your enemy has already decided that you need to die, and to risk their own lives accomplishing the task. Getting them to change their mind at that point would require massive, massive penalties to your Diplomacy check.

The synergies do stack, because they all provide a +2 bonus, unnamed as others have already noted. I have a 5th-level bard with a +17 Diplomacy whom I'm looking forward to playing soon. Even though I don't think he'll be ending many fights with Diplomacy, it is nice that pretty much any Indifferent NPC he meets is automatically Friendly even before a die roll. Here's to many happy discounts at the mage's laboratory.

 

[CyberSpyder]

Eh...that doesn't seem to make that much sense. The chart of diplomacy DCs includes difficulties for increasing attitudes from Hostile, which is what attacking NPCs will (presumably) be. If hostility is meant to prevent effective use of diplomacy, I would presume that those numbers would be drastically increased, or at the very least, that there would be some sort of note about it in the skill description.

Admittedly, there are some circumstances in which it might not make sense to end a combat that way, like if you're attacked by guards when invading a castle. But as many combats tend to be of the 'random encounter' sort, it makes sense to me that you could stop a fight with an enemy that doesn't really have much reason to attack you in the first place.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Eh...that doesn't seem to make that much sense. The chart of diplomacy DCs includes difficulties for increasing attitudes from Hostile, which is what attacking NPCs will (presumably) be. If hostility is meant to prevent effective use of diplomacy, I would presume that those numbers would be drastically increased, or at the very least, that there would be some sort of note about it in the skill description.

Bard walks into a bar, slaps the barmaid on the...(looks around for Eric's Grandmother)...posterior...and cries out for a drink. The innkeeper, whose wife just left him the day before, and whose daughter's posterior was the one slapped, comes over and angrily asks what the bard wants (hostile).

Etc. etc. Or perhaps you're a drow elf, and everyone is hostile to you at first glance. Or perhaps there are rumors circulating that you killed a child in a previous town (started by the BBEG, of course.)

In any case, there are many reasons why an NPC would be hostile to you. Hostile does not mean engaged in lethal combat, IMO. The moment you go from trading insults to trading blows, things have moved beyond the NPC Attitude adjustment charts.

But as many combats tend to be of the 'random encounter' sort, it makes sense to me that you could stop a fight with an enemy that doesn't really have much reason to attack you in the first place.

This may be true in your game, though I haven't had it be true in mine. Very few random encounters with marauding bandits. More encounters with the BBEG's henchman, or goblin hordes, etc. Though I do agree with your point here: that it should be possible to stop a battle in which your foes have no real reason for attacking you. I just tend to think that such instances are very rare. Even random bandits have a reason for attacking you: they want your stuff. And Diplomacy is going to have a hard time convincing them that they don't want your stuff. (Though Diplomacy might stop the fight long enough to use Intimidate...)

 

[CyberSpyder]

Bard walks into a bar, slaps the barmaid on the...(looks around for Eric's Grandmother)...posterior...and cries out for a drink. The innkeeper, whose wife just left him the day before, and whose daughter's posterior was the one slapped, comes over and angrily asks what the bard wants (hostile).

Etc. etc. Or perhaps you're a drow elf, and everyone is hostile to you at first glance. Or perhaps there are rumors circulating that you killed a child in a previous town (started by the BBEG, of course.)

In any case, there are many reasons why an NPC would be hostile to you. Hostile does not mean engaged in lethal combat, IMO. The moment you go from trading insults to trading blows, things have moved beyond the NPC Attitude adjustment charts.

I disagree. The attitude charts specifically state, for instance, that one of the possible actions of a hostile character is attacking, and it seems unlikely that their performing that action would cause them to drop off the chart.

Moreover, your examples sound more like the 'Unfriendly' attitude would be appropriate, rather than hostile. The innkeeper in question probably wouldn't actually attack the bard, unless he did more to arouse his ire, but the possible actions for an unfriendly character - "Mislead, gossip, avoid, watch suspiciously, insult" - sound very likely. The same is true for the Drow elf - depending on the setting, everyone that saw it probably wouldn't rush over with an axe, but they also wouldn't treat it too kindly.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

*shrug* Then we disagree.

 

[CyberSpyder]

*shrug* Then we disagree.

Hey, that's not how it works. We're supposed to keep bickering back and forth for another couple pages.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Hey, that's not how it works. We're supposed to keep bickering back and forth for another couple pages.

Where's the laughing smiley when you need it?

 

[Waldo]

I feel like Diplomacy is one of the hardest things to DM well. As a DM, I don't want to invalidate my player's abilities. I like role-play and interaction and I want Diplomacy to be used in my games.

But I have problems letting that much control of an NPCs personality go to a die roll, one that's not weighted by HD at that. I just don't feel that a Bard should be able to make friends with everything he sees, regardless of its intent or purpose.

"My word, an assassin! Friend!? Don't kill me. Have a beer!"
"Everyone told me I was crazy, but I love my new best friend. How many people have Ancient Red Wyrms for buddies?"
"I know he's our archnemesis who we've been pursuing for a decade, but when I finally met him, he didn't seem like such a bad lich."

<insert sappy music here>

Anyways... it's a tricky thing. I want it to be useful, but it shouldn't be a free permanent charm person, nor should it work in every scenario. Lots and lots of DC modifiers, IMO.

 

[Artoomis]

I'd allow dimplomacy to end a battle. However, I'd also note a few things:

Some opponents will fight to the death, no matter what. This could be stupidity, fear of someone more powerful, some sort of fanaticism, or something else. Diplomacy will be near impossibke. -20, at least.

Also, I'd only allow it to work if approriate actions are taken. Things like dropping your weapon - having the whole party drop their weapons, etc., etc.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Lets go with some scenarios.

The bard walks in and slaps the barmaid on the posterior. This offends the inkeep. Depending on the inkeeper's final reaction:

Hostile: Attacks the guy, throws him out of the inn.

Unfriendly: Gives bad service, raises prices, and acts surly

Neutral: Grumbles about it a bit, but doesn't take any action

Friendly: Explains to the bard about sensibilities around these here parts, and how his actions could be misunderstood.

Helpful: As friendly, but also smooths it over with the barmaid.

That's a fairly easy one. How about

Fanatical henchman of an evildoer, who's about to destroy the city

Hostile: Does his best to make sure the heroes stay in the city. If free, will probably lash out, attack them, tie them up or outright kill them.

Unfriendly: Does his best to make sure the heroes stay in the city, most likely by minor subterfuge. Unlikely to attack them unless they ask for it.

Neutral: Couldn't care less whether the heroes get killed by the destruction of the city. Will still not let them stop his master's plan.

Friendly: "Hey buddy, I was just going over to haverbrook today - wanna come? It'll be great!" - on the day of the destruction of the city.

Helpful:"Look, I can't tell you what's going on, but you have to leave the city for your own good. I really mean it. And you'd best watch your backs".

Note the evil henchman doesn't stop being an evil henchman just because he wants to help the heroes. The henchman can have MULTIPLE helpful attitudes towards different parties. Hell - he may even have different attitudes towards members of the same party.

And of course - if there's a fight going on, and the reasons for that fight are still present after the diplomacy check, then the fight will most likely resume.
ie:

Some orcs are fighting to defend their home. They attacked without warning.

Final reaction:
Hostile - duh. They still attack. Only they're not going to take prisoners, or tie you up and dump you in the forest as a warning to others. They want you dead. They'll coup-de-grace anyone who isn't already on -10 at the end of the fight. Surrender will not be an option for you. If you run, they'll probably pursue without a good reason not to.

Unfriendly - they may possibly make clear the reasons for their attack while fighting "You leave now, we not squish you!". Party members are left alone once they're unconscious, or dragged away from the area. They'll most likely be robbed. Surrender is probably an option, but you won't get to keep your stuff, and you'll be bound and probably beaten a bit. If you run, they'll probably let you.

Neutral - Sorry, but the fight's still on unless you quit first. Surrender will probably be allowed, and you'll probably be told to leave immediately. They may deal with you if your offer is particularly generous and your request minor.

Friendly - They're willing to stop fighting if you do. It was all a big mistake. You still can't come in, but they'll be willing to talk before you leave. You can probably make a fair deal to get what you want.

Helpful - As friendly, but they'll probably invite you in for dinner. You're probably welcome to drop by later.

Note that the orcs still have an agenda even when they're neutral and friendly - they wanted you off their land, and they still do. You didn't change that. They might be willing to bend in exchange for something.