D&D (2024) Influence Action

[DEFCON 1]

Set DC 15 across the board on these kind of checks are going to be easy to abuse.

Again, let the DMs DM. Trust them to set the difficulty.

They will. Those that need the rule will use it, those that don't will ignore it.

There are very few experienced DMs out there who stick with using RAW even when they hate said RAW. And any DMs who do that... hobble themselves with unwanted rules because they have this mistaken belief there's something "noble" about playing RAW (which there isn't)... then they are cutting off their nose to spite their face. And we needn't feel bad for them for doing that to themselves.

 

[Charlaquin]

Set DC 15 across the board on these kind of checks are going to be easy to abuse.

Again, let the DMs DM. Trust them to set the difficulty.

I’m fine with 15s as a recommendation for DMs when they aren’t sure what DC they want to use. But it should only be that; a fallback option when you don’t know what else to do.

 

[Amrûnril]

I'm glad there's a clear statement that some requests don't require checks and some are impossible. It's absurd, though, to make every request that falls between those extremes equal in difficulty.

From a player perspective, a fixed DC of 15 makes it difficult for an average character to achieve even modest concessions through diplomacy, while at the same time limiting the rewards for high levels of specialization in diplomacy. From a DM perspective, it makes it much harder to account for NPC personalities and relationships and the nature of PC requests in a nuanced way.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

What bothers me so much about having the DC be based on a stat of the person you're trying to influence, is that it assumes the smarter, wiser, etc the person is, the less likely your attempt to influence them is to work...

Which makes sense if you are trying to deceive them, and maybe if your were trying to intimidate them (though D&D lacks a real courage stat to resist with), but a lot of the times the PCs are just trying to get them to do something that is literally for their own good! In that case, having a higher Int or Wis should make them more likely to go along with it!

This is one thing that the 2014 DMG got right. It makes the target's stats have nothing to do with it, and the DC is based on how much they already like/trust you and how much you are asking of them, and then you can get Advantage/Disadvantage for other things relative their traits.

I just don't get why nobody ever seems to bring this issue up.

 

[Scribe]

What bothers me so much about having the DC be based on a stat of the person you're trying to influence, is that it assumes the smarter, wiser, etc the person is, the less likely your attempt to influence them is to work...

Which makes sense if you are trying to deceive them, and maybe if your were trying to intimidate them (though D&D lacks a real courage stat to resist with), but a lot of the times the PCs are just trying to get them to do something that is literally for their own good! In that case, having a higher Int or Wis should make them more likely to go along with it!

This is one thing that the 2014 DMG got right. It makes the target's stats have nothing to do with it, and the DC is based on how much they already like/trust you and how much you are asking of them, and then you can get Advantage/Disadvantage for other things relative their traits.

I just don't get why nobody ever seems to bring this issue up.

If it's actually for their own good, flat out, why is a roll needed.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

If it's actually for their own good, flat out, why is a roll needed.

Have you met people? For example why it is such a struggle to get anyone to do anything about the climate change?

 

[Reynard]

If it's actually for their own good, flat out, why is a roll needed.

Because people are stubborn and hold on to pride even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

[Scribe]

Have you met people? For example why it is such a struggle to get anyone to do anything about the climate change?

Pretty sure we cannot have that particular conversation.

Yes, I've met people however. I in fact have a very VERY relevant example of one such person who despite the reality of the situation they are in, wont listen to a word I have to say.

People can disagree that things are 'in their best interests' and also, how to realize those goals or milestones.

You wont need an influence roll for 'here, have 10 gold pieces'.

 

[Scribe]

What bothers me so much about having the DC be based on a stat of the person you're trying to influence, is that it assumes the smarter, wiser, etc the person is, the less likely your attempt to influence them is to work...

Because people are stubborn and hold on to pride even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

So lets look at this.

You know who is stubborn? Prideful?

People who are convinced they are educated on the issue, the smartest guy in the room, the ones who know the 'facts'.

I again think of the person in my life this most applies to, and just cannot help but laugh, because hes not unintelligent at all, hes just learned the wrong lesson from his experiences.

 

[Reynard]

So lets look at this.

You know who is stubborn? Prideful?

People who are convinced they are educated on the issue, the smartest guy in the room, the ones who know the 'facts'.

I again think of the person in my life this most applies to, and just cannot help but laugh, because hes not unintelligent at all, hes just learned the wrong lesson from his experiences.

What does that have to do with your implication that you don't need a roll to.convince a person?