Inspiration is a PC-on-PC Social Skills Question

[mellored]

Reconsider what you are saying. Here, in your own words:

"In inspiring a creature, a character carefully chooses words with deep emotional meaning, weaves them into a particular sentence, and says them in a particular way, and then is heard by the target unleashing the desired effect - in most cases, all in the span of a seconds."

Yes. That's the same hand waving excuse that magic has.

You later went on to insure we all knew it was entirely non-magical influence on an ally that achieves the desired result.

And your still missing the point.

There's no difference between...
"Your wiggle your fingers in a very particular to cause vibrations to cause a character to feel certain way."
vs
"Your wiggle your tongue in a very particular to cause vibrations to cause a character to feel certain way."

Now, explain how what I quoted is not equally applicable to a warlord inspiring an ally as it is for the rogue using a social skill check agasint his barbarian ally (as presented in my example to which you took exception).

It's also equal to a wizard casting friends, a bard casting suggestion, a cleric casting bless, a warlock casting fear, or a vampire's charm.


Though one big difference is that if a warlord's tells someone to make extra attacks, and they don't want to, they don't. No die roll needed; it simply fails.

 

[Tony Vargas]

To expand, it's because when no magic is involved, getting your allies to fight longer and harder happens through social skill. Some of the buffing could arguably come from tactical ability, but I don't see how that would translate to healing (restoring HPs or rousing unconscious allies).

Good tactics could indirectly result in better morale, if you see a tactic succeed it could buoy your resolve, if you have seen tactics pull victory from the jaws of defeat before you could be less inclined to give up. It would be a case of the character not being inspiring so much as the events the character set in motion. Inspiration needn't be a rousing speech (which your average RPG nerd might not be too likely to deliver convincingly, and another such might, perhaps one on the cynical side, be all too inclined to imagine as hackneyed), it needn't even be positive. You could be inspired to do better by words, or, perhaps by deeds, or even by wanting to show up a rival. That one PC inspires another, giving him a bonus, needn't mean the inspired PC looks up to or respects the inspiring one. Sure, stereotypically, you think of a hero inspiring common folk by great oratory or fantastic deeds. In genre, though, heroes may get inspired by other heroes, they can also be inspired by a plucky side-kick, despised ally of necessity, or bitter rival. The nature of the relationship would inform the narrative, and may or may not have a bearing on the resolution of the mechanics.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

There's no difference between...
"Your wiggle your fingers in a very particular to cause vibrations to cause a character to feel certain way."
vs
"Your wiggle your tongue in a very particular to cause vibrations to cause a character to feel certain way."

I feel safe in declaring that you are doubtless one of the few people in the hobby with such an obtuse opinion on the differences between magic and mundane.

It's also equal to a wizard casting friends, a bard casting suggestion, a cleric casting bless, a warlock casting fear, or a vampire's charm.

No its not.

Though one big difference is that if a warlord's tells someone to make extra attacks, and they don't want to, they don't. No die roll needed; it simply fails.

You seem to be of the opinion that a hasted barbarian (one of your favorite examples) is required to take the extra action granted by the magical spell? This is another example of your woeful lack of knowledge regarding 5e seeping to the surface.

 

[mellored]

I feel safe in declaring that you are doubtless one of the few people in the hobby with such an obtuse opinion on the differences between magic and mundane.

Then present your argument as to why they are different.

Why is it ok for someone to tell someone else character how to feel.
But not ok for someone to tell someone else character how to feel?

You seem to be of the opinion that a hasted barbarian (one of your favorite examples) is required to take the extra action granted by the magical spell? This is another example of your woeful lack of knowledge regarding 5e seeping to the surface.

Haste requires a willing target, and gives you the opportunity, not force you, to make an extra attack.

So yes, that's pretty similar to what a warlord would do.

And it's actually different from friends/charm/suggestion/diplomacy/intimidate/ect... which lets you dictate another characters feelings, with a good roll.

 

[jayoungr]

Good tactics could indirectly result in better morale, if you see a tactic succeed it could buoy your resolve, if you have seen tactics pull victory from the jaws of defeat before you could be less inclined to give up. It would be a case of the character not being inspiring so much as the events the character set in motion.

It could be argued that in such a case, tactics become a social skill, since they're being used for social influence.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Then present your argument as to why they are different.

Magic.

Why is it ok for someone to tell someone else character how to feel.
But not ok for someone to tell someone else character how to feel?

Magic?

Haste requires a willing target, and gives you the opportunity, not force you, to make an extra attack.

Magically.

So yes, that's pretty similar to what a warlord would do.

Magically?

And it's actually different from friends/charm/suggestion/diplomacy/intimidate/ect... which lets you dictate another characters feelings, with a good roll.

You are mixing magical and non-magical game elements between those slash marks. Just an FYI.

 

[jayoungr]

I would also add that a lot of tables--not all, but a lot--would not be cool with a PC casting friends, charm, suggestion, or fear on another PC, except maybe as a joke. To say that a Warlord's abilities are no different just invites those tables to reject the Warlord as well.

I think non-magical skills such as Persuasion and Intimidation are better analogues for the inspiration of a non-magical PC anyway. But then, a lot of tables are also not okay with PCs using those skills on other PCs.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Wouldn't it just be so much easier if some people would just admit that what they really want is a class designed around robbing agency from the other players as its core concept and purpose? That they want to be the guy the other PCs must look up to and respect, "cuz class features say so"?

In sticking with the premise of this thread, its no different than a player making a high social skill character and asking to be able to use the mechanics of said skills on the other PCs so as to manipulate their thoughts and emotions.

No different at all. Exactly the same.

 

[mellored]

Magic.

Magic?

Magically.

Magically?

Repeating that word isn't an argument.

You are mixing magical and non-magical game elements between those slash marks. Just an FYI.

Not sure what your point is.

You tell the half-orc barbarian that he's afraid of your halfing, a die is rolled, and if favors you, you get to decide the barbarian's feelings.

 

[jayoungr]

Wouldn't it just be so much easier if some people would just admit that what they really want is a class designed around robbing agency from the other players as its core concept and purpose? That they want to be the guy the other PCs must look up to and respect, "cuz class features say so"?

There may be some who want that deep down, but I don't think everyone who wants a warlord does. Assuming bad faith won't lead to a productive discussion, anyway.

I'm interested to know whether anyone sees a difference between warlord inspiration and PC-on-PC social skills, though. In other words, is there a correlation between liking inspirational mechanics and being okay with interparty use of other social mechanics?