PC skill vs. PC

I had a Binder with a ridiculous Bluff skill. I almost always used it on the party. We had a rule that a natural 20 would add 10. I through a few 20s. "What happened to that full plate you were wearing?" "I have no idea what you're talking about." "You realize that the Binder honestly has no clue what you're talking about." Bluff is my new favorite skill.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Stalker0 said:
I agree, the spirit of good roleplaying means you should try to play out the skills.

For example, the barbarian vs the rogue pixie, argument. The barbarian backs off, later whispering to the wizard, "I have never seen such conviction on Phain's face before. It was....disturbing."

Okay, as the person playing the pixie rogue in question (she's not an actual pixie -- just very smallish and angry), I'd like to just say that, yes, it would be in the spririt of roleplay. For example, if a 1 was rolled she'd probably march up to him and call him a meaniepants. Something laughable. A natural 20, I'm not counting on, but I've been trying to think up a way to properly dialogue most outcomes.
 

If you can use all of these skills except diplomacy on PCs, why aren't rogues the effective party leaders in most parties? Are the players not taking full advantage of their powers or is there something that limits their powers in the rules?
 


roguerouge said:
If you can use all of these skills except diplomacy on PCs, why aren't rogues the effective party leaders in most parties? Are the players not taking full advantage of their powers or is there something that limits their powers in the rules?

Bluff and intimidate only work short term, then the characters can react how they want. They also take time to work.

A wizard PC can use charm person and make you feel he is your best friend, but this too wears off and then you have to deal with the person afterwards.

Many feel it is poor form to use powers on other PCs.
 

Ive seen bluff and sense motive used regularly on the other PCs, as why would one PC just blindly trust another PC (hence sense motive), specially that crafty rogue who is giving you the money he just "found". While I dont think its best for the party to have secrets, sometimes youve got to bluff.

Intimidate is just a bad thing for the party. It provides a friend for a short period, but then they drop ever further. Basically you can force the party member to be friendly towards you, but then he is going to lean more towards hating you. I dont like actions that tear a party down, lord knows some parties have enough issues.

This is the main flaw Ive seen in evil parties. Everyone wants the "dont deal with crap, major badass" who wont back down from the other party members. Next thing you know everyone is pulling swords because "They" wont be the one who backs down. Intimidate rolls start going, and blood is shed because your character is evil, and that must mean you kill at the slightest insult.
 

roguerouge said:
If you can use all of these skills except diplomacy on PCs, why aren't rogues the effective party leaders in most parties? Are the players not taking full advantage of their powers or is there something that limits their powers in the rules?

Because if one player continually tries to 'game' the others into doing what he wants, rather than using his big boy words, he is probably going to get kicked in the junk... And noone likes to get kicked in the junk.

Later
silver
 


Diplimacy specifically says in the rules text it cannot be used against a PC.

Intimidate implies that same rule by including the Diplomacy text by reference.

Bluff does not have such a rule, and therefore can be used against a PC. Indeed, that's a primary purpose of sense motive - to counter bluffs used against you.

Sense motive can be used against a PC. Indeed, it's one of the NPCs primary defenses against being bluffed by a PC.
 


Remove ads

Top