D&D (2024) Influence Action

[Micah Sweet]

Could this simply be a case of the designers needing to give Intelligence more work to do in the game as a stat, and thus shoehorning this in there?

Possibly. Not very diagetic though.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Because it’s very easy to focus on getting bonuses on those checks to make a DC 15 trivial.

Okay. And?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Typical example: The monsters are going to invade, and you need to get the local leader to prepare, etc.

Linking their resistance to the idea to a high stat (go with Wisdom rather than Int if it helps you see the issue) doesn't make sense for a Persuasion attempt, where you are by definition of the skill communicating honestly.

Pride being an issue is exactly the sort of thing I'm agreeing should matter, but linking it to high ability scores is ridiculous.

 

[Reynard]

Typical example: The monsters are going to invade, and you need to get the local leader to prepare, etc.

Linking their resistance to the idea to a high stat (go with Wisdom rather than Int if it helps you see the issue) doesn't make sense for a Persuasion attempt, where you are by definition of the skill communicating honestly.

Pride being an issue is exactly the sort of thing I'm agreeing should matter, but linking it to high ability scores is ridiculous.

This is a perfect example of how it makes more sense to set a DC based on what the NPC believes and/or desires, rather than using a stat. People hold on to their beliefs, until they don't. They don't need to be "tricked."

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is a perfect example of how it makes more sense to set a DC based on what the NPC believes and/or desires, rather than using a stat. People hold on to their beliefs, until they don't. They don't need to be "tricked."

They seem to be more interested in having hard mechanical rules than in effects "making sense".

 

[TiQuinn]

Okay. And?

And what?

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is a perfect example of how it makes more sense to set a DC based on what the NPC believes and/or desires, rather than using a stat. People hold on to their beliefs, until they don't. They don't need to be "tricked."

Then change the DC. Your PHB will not come alive and eat your dog if you do. Personally, as a player and DM, I really like the idea of knowing that 15 is the baseline that I should build and plan around. If I want it to be easier? It will be. Harder? It will be.

I also like the idea of the DC changing on high INT creatures. Frankly, they likely were trying to decide between INT and WIS and noticed that they don't have a lot of low wisdom creatures, nor a lot of very high wisdom creatures. It tends to be a middling stat for most.

 

[Chaosmancer]

And what?

And how is it abusable that players can get bonuses to hit a DC 15, when the DM is still the one that can call for the check and is explicitly empowered to deny the check if they are asking unreasonable things of the individual?

Additionally, the rules are written to allow plenty of leeway for the DM to change the DC if they want.

So, again, how is this abusable?

 

[TiQuinn]

And how is it abusable that players can get bonuses to hit a DC 15, when the DM is still the one that can call for the check and is explicitly empowered to deny the check if they are asking unreasonable things of the individual?

Additionally, the rules are written to allow plenty of leeway for the DM to change the DC if they want.

So, again, how is this abusable?

As described, it’s a static DC 15. Yes, of course I know I can change it. The point is simply how it’s written in the new edition, and as written, having a flat DC 15 can be abused by any player who decides to they want to go heavy focus on skills.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Perfectly acceptable baseline foundational rule for a DM who has never or barely ever run a game before and has little to no experience figuring out through improvisation or experimentation how to run negotiation scenes with their players.

But once a person has become more experienced in running their game... they will soon realize that they can make up whatever rules they want for running diplomatic, argumentative, exploitative, or intimidating scenes with NPCs. And this basic rule can and will be ignored then because it will no longer be necessary to have anything this organizationally simplistic for them to use. The DM will have grown out of it. Basically the same as say skill challenges.

Ahh, the eternal "DM says is better!" argument. Someday, maybe, people will recognize that "DM says" is not actually particularly compelling gameplay and is in fact really really hard to find enjoyable or engaging because it is almost never consistent or interactive.