Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6067991" data-attributes="member: 42582">Fighters and social conflict resolutionWhat does it take, in combat, to cow a barkeep?And what is the DC to make one your &quot;trusted friend&quot; who will &quot;treat you kindly&quot; and &quot;perceive your words and actions in the most favourable way&quot; (this is the wording for Charm Person + FAQ/errata, as found on the PF SRD <a href="http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/charm-person" target="_blank">here</a>)?The only editions of D&amp;D to have action resolution mechanics that allow the imposition of this sort of outcome on a situation via non-magical means are 3E (via it's rightly criticised Diplomacy rules) and 4e (via its skill challenge mechanics). The lack of ability of the players of non-magical PCs to impose finality on situations other than by killing all the NPCs present is part of what makes combat very much the first among equals of the &quot;three pillars&quot;.Fighters and defendingThis is a carryover from the other thread.I don't understand how this protects an ally who is immediately behind the fighter - because a 5' step around the fighter won't provoke an OA, I don't think, and so won't trigger Stand Still.I also don't understand how this will protect a rogue who is flanking with the fighter. Or, in a situation in which two fighters a holding the line side-by-side against two enemies, I don't see how this discourages &quot;focus-fire&quot; by those two enemies on one of the fighters. Whereas in 4e the discouragement is very clear - ignoring the fighter who has marked you gives you penalties to attack and causes you to suffer extra damage.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6067991, member: 42582"] [B]Fighters and social conflict resolution[/B] What does it take, in combat, to cow a barkeep? And what is the DC to make one your "trusted friend" who will "treat you kindly" and "perceive your words and actions in the most favourable way" (this is the wording for Charm Person + FAQ/errata, as found on the PF SRD [url=http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/charm-person]here[/url])? The only editions of D&D to have action resolution mechanics that allow the imposition of this sort of outcome on a situation via non-magical means are 3E (via it's rightly criticised Diplomacy rules) and 4e (via its skill challenge mechanics). The lack of ability of the players of non-magical PCs to impose finality on situations other than by killing all the NPCs present is part of what makes combat very much the first among equals of the "three pillars". [B]Fighters and defending[/B] This is a carryover from the other thread. I don't understand how this protects an ally who is immediately behind the fighter - because a 5' step around the fighter won't provoke an OA, I don't think, and so won't trigger Stand Still. I also don't understand how this will protect a rogue who is flanking with the fighter. Or, in a situation in which two fighters a holding the line side-by-side against two enemies, I don't see how this discourages "focus-fire" by those two enemies on one of the fighters. Whereas in 4e the discouragement is very clear - ignoring the fighter who has marked you gives you penalties to attack and causes you to suffer extra damage. [/QUOTE]

Verification