Please Help: Diplomacy Checks, Dispel Magic

[Artoomis]

Diplomacy is not a combat skill, it is a social skill (I'm paraphrasing from above). A most enlightened statement.

First you have to get them to talk outside of combat. If you can do that in some reasonable manner, then you get the roll.

History and fantasy are both full of certain people who where incredibly good at avoiding a fight. This is part of what diplomacy is all about. It may not seem as heroic as fighting, but it is - every bit of it.

You should absolutely reward the player who puts a great deal of effort into getting his diplomacy skill as high as it can possibly be. On the other hand - its use is not automatic, as has been stated, you've got to get them to talk first. A campaign that has a character or two with very high diplomacy skills will be less combat-heavy than one wihout that advantage. This should not be a problem - each campaign will pick up some of its flavor based upon the special skills and feats of the players.

Have fun!!

 

[Tobold Hornblower]

Hi Artoomis,

Agreed with everything you said except:

A campaign that has a character or two with very high diplomacy skills will be less combat-heavy than one wihout that advantage.

That's not been the case in our game. Encounters resovled through Diplomacy take so little game time, that we still have just as much combat. In fact, we tend to get to bigger conflicts more quickly, bypassing a lot of not-so-challenging foes on the way.

What you say may well be true for some campaigns, especially if the DM likes to force a lot of role-playing. We enjoy that 3e abstracts those long converstations into a quick dice roll, leaving us to get on with the hack and slash up the hall.

 

[Nail]

I agree: don't nerf the Diplomacy skill. Few enough people take it as is.

The key here is maintaining a believable world with rational outcomes; don't be capricious with the "that doesn't work this time" statement. If you really must have some randomness in your RPing diet, try an unmodified Diplomacy check to start things out--then let them Bluff right before combat begins. Diplomacy is all about manner and convincing statements....not about quick one-liners and combat-stoppers. Use Diplomacy after combat has stopped.

And finally:

What's up with the toad idea? You must share......

 

[RJSmalls]

Great responses, fellas. I feel alot better about making rulings on Diplomacy without nerfing the skill or making it uber-powerful.

As far as the toad thing, there's no story to tell (yet). It's just an idea one of my PC's had and I know it'll be coming down the pike once he's high enough level to take the Poly Other spell.

Whee!

RJ

 

[Nail]

As far as the toad thing, there's no story to tell (yet). It's just an idea one of my PC's had and I know it'll be coming down the pike once he's high enough level to take the Poly Other spell.

And you, as DM, didn't ask what he'd be using it for? Fool!

 

[bret]

No Trespassing.

Violators will be Toad.

 

[Nail]

No Trespassing.

Violators will be Toad.

LOL!

But isn't that:
"Violators will be Toad Ogre sharp objects"?

 

[Al]

I agree: don't nerf the Diplomacy skill. Few enough people take it as is.

I play a rather rp-oriented campaign, but I've yet to see a single party of mine where not one of the PCs has Diplomacy at a respectable level.

As for not nerfing it, I would say that it is quite the contrary. Due to fixed DCs, by the mid- to high- levels, Diplomacy unqualified becomes very overpowered. A 10th level rogue with maxed Diplomacy, Charisma 16 and +4 synergy bonuses from Bluff and Sense Motive can take 10 (Skill Mastery) and automatically avoid combat (Hostile becomes Indifferent), convince skeptics (Unfriendly becomes Friendly) and gain help from any random passer-by (Indifferent+ becomes Helpful). This is all for just a fraction of his skill points.

Edit: Now a rogue. I stand by Charisma 16.

 

[Hypersmurf]

A 10th level bard with maxed Diplomacy...

I take it you mean Rogue?

-Hyp.

 

[Malin Genie]

In regards to (1), I would agree as a DM that you need to have some interaction with them in order to use diplomacy - diplomacy certainly can't be used in the heat of combat, and won't forestall already exisiting hostilities. That's not its role.

OTOH, we would generally rule that a succesful intimidate check would give them pause long enough for you to talk to them and try being diplomatic.

Hence they can both be useful (and it's also losts of fun to alternate intimidate/diplomacy in a bad cop/good cop interaction with a prisoner.)