Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Rules, Rules, Rules: Thoughts on the Past, Present, and Future of D&D
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="Oofta" data-source="post: 8850585" data-attributes="member: 6801845"><p>I'm talking about the playtest for the 2024 edition in case it wasn't clear. There's an "influence" action and a given set of responses. For a creature indifferent to the PCs an influence of 10 The creature does as asked, as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved. With a 20 The creature accepts a minor risk or sacrifice to do as asked.</p><p></p><p>So by straight RAW, played by the proposed rule you can get anyone not actively hostile to you to do what you ask, even if there's some risk. If the creature is actually hostile but doesn't attack on sight the DM may just say "no" but with a 20 influence check you can get them to cooperate "as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved."</p><p></p><p>So if there's an enemy force occupying my city, the PC can ask "pretty please let us in to the headquarters" and if I roll high enough (or roll average but have high bonuses) I get in. With the caveat that the DM can always say no of course. I think a lot of DMs, especially new DMs, would feel uncomfortable saying no.</p><p></p><p>These static numbers make no sense to me, higher level PCs that focus on this stuff will pretty much always succeed unless there's some other rule they haven't revealed yet. I think it's the wrong direction to take the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 8850585, member: 6801845"] I'm talking about the playtest for the 2024 edition in case it wasn't clear. There's an "influence" action and a given set of responses. For a creature indifferent to the PCs an influence of 10 The creature does as asked, as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved. With a 20 The creature accepts a minor risk or sacrifice to do as asked. So by straight RAW, played by the proposed rule you can get anyone not actively hostile to you to do what you ask, even if there's some risk. If the creature is actually hostile but doesn't attack on sight the DM may just say "no" but with a 20 influence check you can get them to cooperate "as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved." So if there's an enemy force occupying my city, the PC can ask "pretty please let us in to the headquarters" and if I roll high enough (or roll average but have high bonuses) I get in. With the caveat that the DM can always say no of course. I think a lot of DMs, especially new DMs, would feel uncomfortable saying no. These static numbers make no sense to me, higher level PCs that focus on this stuff will pretty much always succeed unless there's some other rule they haven't revealed yet. I think it's the wrong direction to take the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Rules, Rules, Rules: Thoughts on the Past, Present, and Future of D&D
Top