Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Problems with the Diplomacy skill (plus a total halt to a campaign)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MDK" data-source="post: 6077330" data-attributes="member: 6705182"><p>Regarding the OP, I see 2 problems: First there's not granting a diplomacy check because what the PLAYERS did took less than a whole minute.</p><p>That's like saying that because I can describe my character climbing the 100' cliff in less than 10 seconds, he actually gets up there that fast.</p><p>(quite apart from the fact that whoever put that 1-minute rule in there never had to put together a 1-minute speech. Go try it: 1 minute is a LOT of time!)</p><p>Now I agree that the players seem to have given up rather quickly, but for me, that would have been reason to prompt them a bit: instead of having the NPC just say NO!, I'd have him say something like NO! Whatever for?! thus handing the ball back to the players. In character, I may not be willing to let armed strangers into my house, but I WOULD want to know why they're asking.</p><p></p><p>The second issue I see is that while you claim to not wanting to railroad them, that is in fact exactly what you do. They have to do exactly what you expect them to do, or else the adventure fails, and you take issue with it when that happens (as proven by your coming here rather than just discarding the plot and moving on to the next one). If the players don't want to enter the dungeon, then maybe it's time for something else.</p><p></p><p>Now obviously, as the DM, you put in some hard work to create a scenario, and so you do WANT the players to play the scenario. However, that means you need to make it easy on them to do so. Since getting permission to search the house is required for the scenario to succeed, there should never BE a diplomacy check for them to fail. That's like wanting them to enter a dungeon but at the same time putting a lock on the door they need to pick before they can do so.</p><p>If you WANT the obvious way to have the possibility of failure (diplo check, pick lock check), that means you need to prepare alternative entrances, whether as blatantly as the collapsing street, or as subtle as having the wife pass by with a bored look on her face. Never rely on the players to come up with alternatives, as they may not (as you have found). YOU are the DM, and if any action at all is cruicial to the campaign, you need to either make it an auto-succeed, or have multiple alternatives ready for the players to try. There's no need to make it APPEAR easy to the players, but that's the difference between DM knowledge and Player knowledge.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MDK, post: 6077330, member: 6705182"] Regarding the OP, I see 2 problems: First there's not granting a diplomacy check because what the PLAYERS did took less than a whole minute. That's like saying that because I can describe my character climbing the 100' cliff in less than 10 seconds, he actually gets up there that fast. (quite apart from the fact that whoever put that 1-minute rule in there never had to put together a 1-minute speech. Go try it: 1 minute is a LOT of time!) Now I agree that the players seem to have given up rather quickly, but for me, that would have been reason to prompt them a bit: instead of having the NPC just say NO!, I'd have him say something like NO! Whatever for?! thus handing the ball back to the players. In character, I may not be willing to let armed strangers into my house, but I WOULD want to know why they're asking. The second issue I see is that while you claim to not wanting to railroad them, that is in fact exactly what you do. They have to do exactly what you expect them to do, or else the adventure fails, and you take issue with it when that happens (as proven by your coming here rather than just discarding the plot and moving on to the next one). If the players don't want to enter the dungeon, then maybe it's time for something else. Now obviously, as the DM, you put in some hard work to create a scenario, and so you do WANT the players to play the scenario. However, that means you need to make it easy on them to do so. Since getting permission to search the house is required for the scenario to succeed, there should never BE a diplomacy check for them to fail. That's like wanting them to enter a dungeon but at the same time putting a lock on the door they need to pick before they can do so. If you WANT the obvious way to have the possibility of failure (diplo check, pick lock check), that means you need to prepare alternative entrances, whether as blatantly as the collapsing street, or as subtle as having the wife pass by with a bored look on her face. Never rely on the players to come up with alternatives, as they may not (as you have found). YOU are the DM, and if any action at all is cruicial to the campaign, you need to either make it an auto-succeed, or have multiple alternatives ready for the players to try. There's no need to make it APPEAR easy to the players, but that's the difference between DM knowledge and Player knowledge. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Problems with the Diplomacy skill (plus a total halt to a campaign)
Top