Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6195136" data-attributes="member: 17106">Um, yeah. Based on these posts, you would be well advised to learn the rules you're discussing before posting about them.ninja'd by [MENTION=221]Wicht[/MENTION] but yes on that.Except, you know, all of it. Some of it is in the skill description and some of it would require you to read the general rules for skills and checks, but it is all in black and white.No. There is nothing in the rules that says that. If a player says "I use Diplomacy", that does not necessarily entitle him to a check, for any number of reasons enumerated above. The rules merely enumerate what happens when the player uses Diplomacy.No. There's nothing that says the player knows what the time requirement is. If he wants to make a rushed check, he is still subject to the potential increase in time. Again, it's right there: "In some situations, this time requirement may greatly increase.".In other words, outside of the universal rule that you know explicitly proves you wrong, you are right.What force? In what game would the DM not determine these circumstances? Who else is there to even determine them? Do the players come up to the DM and say "I make a level 15 character with 40 Diplomacy? Run your game?". Do they say "there's a goblin over there, I'm going to go Diplo him?". What circumstances can ever exist in a D&D game that are not created by the DM?AFAICT, you define any action the DM takes as DM force, in which case it isn't a very useful term. It's just DMing.Only if the DM allowed the characters to get close enough to make a check, decided that the king listened patiently to them for the requisite amount of time, and the DM chose not to apply any circumstance modifiers. And of course, if the DM established the existence of said king in the first place.</blockquote>

Verification