Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lord Pendragon" data-source="post: 1821235" data-attributes="member: 707">There is a section, I believe in the DMG under &quot;Influencing NPC Attitude&quot; that speaks to this.&nbsp; It's in regards to diplomacy and notes that one doesn't roll Diplomacy to determine a PC's attitude, the player always decides how his PC responds.&nbsp; This quote can, and I believe should, be extrapolated to include all &quot;influence skills&quot; such as Bluff, Sense Motive, etc.Why?&nbsp; Because Player A's PC should not be subservient to the whims of Player B's character, simply because Player B decided to play a bard or sorcerer.Seriously.&nbsp; I have a 12th-level bard in a game these days that, if he could use his influencing skills on other PCs, would rule the party.--------------------------------------------------------------------------&quot;Hey Fighter Bob, that's a mighty fine looking sword there, mind if I have it?&quot;&quot;What?!&nbsp; This sword is worth 50k!&nbsp; I'm going to keep it for myself, sucker!&quot;&quot;Actually, make an opposed Diplomacy roll.&nbsp; I'd like to pursuade you to give the sword to me, to better benefit the party as a whole.&quot;&quot;Uh...okay.&nbsp; I rolled a 14.&quot;&quot;Oh.&nbsp; Too bad about that.&nbsp; I rolled a 51.&nbsp; Thanks for the sword, sucker.&quot;--------------------------------------------------------------------------Bluff is the same way.&nbsp; Barring magic, a player should always get to decide how his player reacts to a proposition, period.&nbsp; Anything else is going to be unfun for the player who isn't a bard, sorcerer, or paladin.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lord Pendragon, post: 1821235, member: 707"] There is a section, I believe in the DMG under "Influencing NPC Attitude" that speaks to this. It's in regards to diplomacy and notes that one doesn't roll Diplomacy to determine a PC's attitude, the player always decides how his PC responds. This quote can, and I believe should, be extrapolated to include all "influence skills" such as Bluff, Sense Motive, etc. Why? Because Player A's PC should not be subservient to the whims of Player B's character, simply because Player B decided to play a bard or sorcerer. Seriously. I have a 12th-level bard in a game these days that, if he could use his influencing skills on other PCs, would [i]rule the party[/i]. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Hey Fighter Bob, that's a mighty fine looking sword there, mind if I have it?" "[i]What?![/i] This sword is worth 50k! I'm going to keep it for myself, sucker!" "Actually, make an opposed Diplomacy roll. I'd like to pursuade you to give the sword to me, to better benefit the party as a whole." "Uh...okay. I rolled a 14." "Oh. Too bad about that. I rolled a 51. Thanks for the sword, sucker." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bluff is the same way. Barring magic, a player should always get to decide how his player reacts to a proposition, period. Anything else is going to be unfun for the player who isn't a bard, sorcerer, or paladin. [/QUOTE]

Verification