Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="taotad" data-source="post: 100738" data-attributes="member: 3245">wolfpunk is champGood point.But. I wish that every player could role-play an encounter with a diplomat, and I wish I (as the DM) had the creativity to debate every single thing the player wants to. I don't.Sure I might catch myself in a creative spark sometimes and have great fun role-playing a diplomatic encounter realistically, but that isn't really fair to the player wanting to develope his character in that direction. If he has to relate to my stupid mood-swings!&nbsp;With a system like this it would mean players could get more out of following a career in this venue.wolfpunk came ut with a better version of arguments than mine:&nbsp;&nbsp;Haggling using the appraise skill could also be conducted in this way. The difference in skill ranks after ended &quot;Argument&quot; could represent the characters percentage discount to the item in charge.&nbsp;A nice way to reflect a public debate could be to pool all the co-debatants ranks in the relevant skill and let the one with most ranks make the rolls, &quot;damaging&quot; the other parties pool. This would make the encounter last longer, and more intense in the end.&nbsp;It should be noted that winning an argument such as this shouldn't force the other side to change opinion. It just means that one side came through as the winning side to the neutral bystanders.&nbsp;How should CR's be handled in this case I wonder?<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="taotad, post: 100738, member: 3245"] [b]wolfpunk is champ[/b] Good point. But. I wish that every player could role-play an encounter with a diplomat, and I wish I (as the DM) had the creativity to debate every single thing the player wants to. I don't. Sure I might catch myself in a creative spark sometimes and have great fun role-playing a diplomatic encounter realistically, but that isn't really fair to the player wanting to develope his character in that direction. If he has to relate to my stupid mood-swings! With a system like this it would mean players could get more out of following a career in this venue. wolfpunk came ut with a better version of arguments than mine: Haggling using the appraise skill could also be conducted in this way. The difference in skill ranks after ended "Argument" could represent the characters percentage discount to the item in charge. A nice way to reflect a public debate could be to pool all the co-debatants ranks in the relevant skill and let the one with most ranks make the rolls, "damaging" the other parties pool. This would make the encounter last longer, and more intense in the end. It should be noted that winning an argument such as this shouldn't force the other side to change opinion. It just means that one side came through as the winning side to the neutral bystanders. How should CR's be handled in this case I wonder? :D [/QUOTE]

Verification