New Diplomacy system

[Quasqueton]

I searched the forums, but didn't find this discussed before.

What do you think of this system for Diplomacy?

http://www.giantitp.com/Func0010.html

Quasqueton

 

[drunkmoogle]

I like it, and use it as-is. Easy to remember, and prevents the munchkinizing of Diplomacy. So far, there are no diplomats in my group, so it hasn't seen play.

 

[DarkMaster]

I searched the forums, but didn't find this discussed before.

What do you think of this system for Diplomacy?

http://www.giantitp.com/Func0010.html

Quasqueton

I have a much better solution, the one from the RAW.

Opposed diplomacy check, much better than all this. You want to bargain 5000gp with the duke, The duke is an aristocrat (not talking about the class) for sure he is skilled in diplomacy and it will be much harder to negociate than an epic wizard with no social skill.

Also I don't understand why sense motive do not provide a synergy bonus and bluff do, Diplomacy is as much as distorting the thruth as seeing that your "opponent" is distorting the thruth.

 

[Parlan]

I have a much better solution, the one from the RAW.

Opposed diplomacy check, much better than all this. You want to bargain 5000gp with the duke, The duke is an aristocrat (not talking about the class) for sure he is skilled in diplomacy and it will be much harder to negociate than an epic wizard with no social skill.

Yeah, and if you throw in some of the modifiers used for Bluff checks, it should cover most situations.

Obviously, getting the noble to loan/give you 5000 gp should be harder than getting him to loan/give you a couple of torches.

I don t think the standard +2/-2 modifier system provides a large enough modifier for a lot of more extreme cases.

IIRC, Thanee or someone came up with a good version of this a month or so ago.

The version in the link above seemed too complex to me.

 

[fourthmensch]

It is a bit complex, yes. And I'm with Darkfall that the standard opposed Diplomacy checks should cover any kind of negotiations. But at least this system is an improvement over the standard "DC 25"=friendly" and such.

Parlan, do you have Thanee's version handy anywhere, or a link?

 

[Ferrix]

it's good to apply the bluff modifiers to diplomacy as well.

leave the synergy bonuses as they are, a bard who drops 5 ranks in three skills that synergy another skill, is taking up 4 out of 6 granted class skills, which could be used for other stuff. unless you're in a very rp-heavy game with very little combat, this character has his focus and should reap the benefits but out there when he needs to sneak past the ogres, he'll think maybe he could have used a rank or two of hide and move silently.

he's also treating diplomacy too economically, diplomacy can easily not involve trade, although classically it's seen this way, diplomacy is having good manners and sense on how to get people to react well towards you, whether it is for a deal or just when you say hi.

that and i think it's easy enough for a dm to adjudicate diplomacy if they take a second to think about it.

 

[FireLance]

I made the following comments in an earlier thread where this was brought up:

I like the idea of adding relationship and risk vs reward modifiers, but I'm not too sure about adding level and wisdom modifiers. Do NPCs get more contrary as they increase in level? Being wise somehow makes it more difficult to get that person to agree to a good deal?

Level should factor into risk vs reward. At higher levels, certain rewards become less effective. A +1 weapon may be valuable to a 4th-level fighter, but is worth relatively little to a 20th-level fighter with a +5 Vorpal weapon. On the other hand, as NPCs get more personally and socially powerful, risks are also reduced.

Wisdom should seldom enter the picture, unless it is a case of short-term reward vs long-term benefit or danger. To give an extreme example, consider the classic case of an attractive female trying to lure a guard away from his post. A guard with high Wisdom might see that any short term benefit he might enjoy is not worth the risk of leaving his post.