New "Bullet Points" up at WotC: Nonlethal Combat

[Darke]

What do you do with the rules for Intimidation, Diplomacy etc. where it says that PC's can simply disregard an NPC's rolls?

I describe the situation more dangerous than it is in reality? The GM-piloted NPC lies (and as I as the GM knows all he lies really good )? etc.



das Darke

 

[Saeviomagy]

It's fairly easy to drop the right hints to manipulate the players when you want to pull off a certain diplomacy result - after all, any GM worth his salt knows pretty much exactly what his players are planning, what their backgrounds are like etc. So you still use the rules, you just don't say "you like this NPC". It's just that the NPC pulls all the right strings.

Intimidate? It's pretty easy to give an NPC description that's intimidating. Failing that, you can use metagame cues to the same effect (ie - rolling lots of dice, asking for spot checks etc) - manipulate the players, not the PC's.

If you think these sorts of tactics are dirty and underhanded, then I'd suggest you ask your players to respond to intimidate checks like they were NPCs. I think the primary reason the book says not to do this is because it makes for a very dry and unengaging game for the PC's.

 

[takyris]

I discussed a case of this once on a different board, using D&D metaphors, but I think that it still works for d20 Modern.

Let's say that there are four players, and they are each trying to get into a nightclub. There are four doors to get in -- a North, South, East, and West door. Each door has an Incredibly Intimidating Doorman.

The Charismatic Hero tries to get past the Doorman at the North door. The Doorman tells him to get lost or get a good doctor. I roll Intimidate, the Charismatic Hero rolls his level check, and the results indicate that the Smart Hero is intimidated.

The Charismatic Hero says, "Okay, I apologize and start sucking up to him, telling him that I'm sorry I gave him any kind of trouble and making it clear that I'm no kind of threat. In fact, I wouldn't have tried anything if I'd known how tough this guy is. Maybe some sucking up through Diplomacy can get this guy's attitude good enough that I can maybe Bribe him or something. I'm scared, though, and if he doesn't bite at the diplomacy, I'm outta there with more apologizing."

I thank him for roleplaying.

The Fast Hero tries the same thing at the South door and is also intimidated successfully. He tells me, "Okay, in that case, I'm going to head across the street and hide in the shadows, then see if I can sneak in with a crowd. I'm scared to death of this dude, though, and if he gives any sign of having seen me, I'm making use of my good movement rate."

I thank him for roleplaying.

The Strong Hero tries the same thing at the West door and gets intimidated successfully. He tells me, "Alright, my guy's fists clench tightly and he shouts, 'Oh, really? You looking to start something?' Without waiting for a response, he attacks. He's freaked out and reacting with fight rather than flight, and I'm Power Attacking more than I should and Charging, even though I know that this guy is probably gonna hit me back."

I thank him for roleplaying.

The Dedicated Hero tries the same thing at the East door and gets intimidated successfully. He tells me, "Well, I'm going to ask him again and see if he looks like he might be up for a bribe. Does he look like someone I could take in a fight? Maybe I could sneak past him."

I tell the Dedicated Hero that his character is not ACTING intimidated -- those are all perfectly valid ways to act for certain character types, but he shouldn't min-max. He should decide what his character would do if his character were genuinely frightened that someone could do him grevious physical harm.

And if the Dedicated Hero insisted on trying to do other stuff, I'd start piling on circumstance penalties -- because the character is in denial about his own fear, everything that he does is affected by it.

-Tacky

 

[Thomas Hobbes]

A good houserule I've seen (eslsewhere on these boards, I think) that "fixes" the nonlethal damage system is to change the text on when nonlethal damage forces a Fortitude save. Have it read "A character must make a save when a he takes nonlethal damage equal to or greater than his Consitution scoreor current hitpoints."

This means that, if two schoolkids are going at it and have no chance to knock each other out just swinging, they'll attack each other dealing lethal until one of them hits. This'll knock their opponent down a couple of points- down to the point where a nonlethal damage roll has a decent chance of forcing a save. If he's not down that far, you can try for lethal damage again and see what you get. This allows for both the possibility of knocking someone unconcious untrained, and for "friendly fights" to turn dangerous, when someone does lethal damage when it turns out nonlethal would've sufficed. Also, it means that if you get knocked down after taking some lethal damage, you'll be hurting for a few more days, too, which seems to be about right (I'm not sorry to say I lack expierience in this field.)

 

[Plane Sailing]

A good houserule I've seen (eslsewhere on these boards, I think) that "fixes" the nonlethal damage system is to change the text on when nonlethal damage forces a Fortitude save. Have it read "A character must make a save when a he takes nonlethal damage equal to or greater than his Consitution scoreor current hitpoints."

Um, like, the top of this page !?!

 

[Thomas Hobbes]

Yay. Chalk one up for obliviousness. Sorry.

Anyway, that seems to be the best I've seen thus far.

edit: But now that I look at it, no one really responded to it. So what do y'all think?

And again, apologies for restating it. If "not making of a fool of yourself online" counts as a "touch" I've lost my touch recently...