Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Saeviomagy" data-source="post: 1440896" data-attributes="member: 5890">If the character talks to the wrong guy, he'll get no information. If they're diplomatic, but ask the wrong questions, they'll get no information.I've watched this sort of thing happen, when the DM is genuinely interested in an interactive game, and not simply a "OK, that 30 on the diplomacy check gets the guy to tell you X, Y and Z. Who do you talk to next?", it's entirely possible for the clueless diplomat to wander around doing absolutely nothing, because he talks to the wrong people about the wrong topics.Similarly, I've seen games where the DM has chosen not to use a battlemap, and therefore most tactical decisions are taken out of the hands of the players - their feats and class abilities dictate how the combat goes. All they really have to do is pick a target and a weapon to hit them with. And even that much choice makes a serious difference to the outcome of a combat.The player is expected to know which of bluff/diplomacy/intimidate to use, and which people he needs to talk to, and what topics he needs to talk about. A 'helpful' NPC doesn't know what the PC needs to know. And if the PC doesn't know either, then no meaningful exchange of information takes place.So without some codification, the GM is going to make up rules on the fly, write them down in a big codex and remember which ones apply when. Or not - he'll most likely make up a rule for one time, forget it, and make up a different one the next time.If you codify your against-the-rules maneuvers, and make it the player's job to keep track of them, it makes the GM and player's positions much easier.Says whom? You?The bluff rules require the player to choose what his lie is. The opposed roll is then governed by the situation that the NPC is in - whether he is inclined to believe the bluff, or find it risky, or whatever.The player STILL needs to pick the lie that he's putting forth, and he STILL needs to think about whether it's believable or risky to the NPC.The diplomacy rules allow you to change the 'reaction' of an NPC. They don't get you any information whatsoever.The sense motive rules just tell you that something's not quite right about this guy. They don't tell you the exact lie that he told.Gather information gets you rumours, maps, items and the like. It doesn't simply reveal major plot points, unless those major plot points are in the form of rumours. Take a look at the Dungeon adventure path for how rumours go - make a roll, get some random rumours.Not one of these is a "make a roll, find out all you need to know/persuade someone to hand you their priceless artwork/know exactly what someone is thinking".Roleplay is still necessary. Player's thinking is still necessary.What isn't necessary is knowing the exact right words to say in a situation, and (for the DM) knowing exactly how the NPC will react to them. That's all.Beyond that, if you enjoy roleplay, you'll do it regardless of the rules. Roleplay doesn't need rules support, and complaining that the rules don't support it is like saying "if I jump off a cliff, the air doesn't hold me up - that's not fair!". Note that I'm not saying that roleplaying is like jumping off a cliff in any other way - just that you don't expect the air to hold you up in the same way that you shouldn't expect the rules to do the work for you.Good for you. Glad to see you're going to stick with the system that works.</blockquote>

Verification