Usurping the party spokesman role

[Stone Angel]

I think that it's kind of cool, especially if the player wanted his character to become the leader. You see this all the time in fiction. A change in the wind and a shift in power. How are you wrapped up in all with this are you one of the players, or are you among others in the party or the DM. How are the others reacting to this?


The Seraph of Earth and Stone

 

[Chimera]

No biggie, really -- The rogue PC is excellent at locks/traps/sneaking. And he'll realize sooner or later that if he wanted to keep the Diplomacy limelight, he should have tried harder. As it is, he's got other skills to play up at the table.

That's kinda how I look at it. In one level-up, the Rogue can make a huge jump in his Diplomacy skill and in a few levels, blow away anything the Fighter can come up with.

If he has a mind to.

But if he's just whining and upset because someone else is "stepping on his toes", then I have no sympathy whatsoever. I don't have any patience for players who get upset because another character "infringes" in an area they want to monopolize.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I don't have any patience for players who get upset because another character "infringes" in an area they want to monopolize.

You don't think niche protection is important? It's one of the main advantages of D&D.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

You don't think niche protection is important? It's one of the main disadvantages of D&D.

Fixed it.

(I know, that's not ENWorld etiquette, but I just couldn't resist in this case, and I trust it was obvious enough)

No, I don't think niche protection is important. I think it's outmoded, annoying and responsible for most of the rules exceptions that have endured unfixed from past versions of D&D to the current one, such as turning undead and bardic knowledge. Not to mention the awful low fighter skill points and pathetic class skill list.

In this case, the players definitely need to address any out of game conflicts they may have over this, however petty it may be for them to have those conflicts. In-game, it could easily evolve into an interesting rivalry, friendly or otherwise. Conan often experienced something similar - joining a band of likely rogues, fighting beside their leader, and eventually becoming the one the rest of the band followed and trusted. Of course, Conan usually ended up killing or driving off the previous leader, so that may not be the best example...

 

[BSF]

Niche protection is a good thing and I tend to highlight potential conflicts for my players as they advance. But it sounds like the rogue assumed he had the niche staked out by putting a token number of points into it.

I see this often in my game. One of the players tends to think that a +10 to the skill check is as high as he needs to go. When he was playing a rogue, this made for a very diversified rogue. But it also meant he wasn't very good at oppossed skill checks as the group increased in power. When other PCs started doing better with Spot, Listen and Search, he got a little twitchy. The problem is when PCs start running around at 12th level and the rogue expects his spot skill niche to be "protected" with his +10 total skill bonus, he really gave up that niche.

It sounds like the rogue in this case has done something similar with Diplomacy. He put some skill ranks into it to be good enough and then assumed that it was his niche. The fighter has been developing diplomacy and has finally exceeded the rogue. If it were really an important niche to the rogue, he could have developed it further and the fighter would never be able to touch him.

In this case, I probably would let it all sort itself out with the players. After all, the rogue still has a lot of utility in the group. As well, he has plenty of potential to use social skills in other situations. Perhaps the fighter brushes shoulders with the upper crust while the rogue gets on well with the common man. Or vice-versa. As a DM, I would look for those opportunities to bring more benefits to the entire group. They have two "face men" now and they can pick up information, friends and assistance from many different efforts.

Now if one or both players have serious issues with it, then it is time to discuss things. The fighter has really taken a hit in skills and stat boost to get where he is. He has been working at it. The rogue assumed that his high Cha and a couple of ranks would be enough to carry him through and then focused on other skills. If the rogue really wants that alpha male face man status, he has to work at it. Fortunately, he has 8 skill points base to work with at the next level. You want to be the face man? Put your skill points in the social skills.

But really, I see no reason why you can't have multiple avenues of working the general population with both PCs.

 

[BSF]

MoogleEmpMog, what you are referring to as niche protection and what I refer to as niche protection are two completely different things. Hmm, differing terminology. I consider niche protection to be a matter of the dynamics of the group. Not a function of skills. Every PC needs a place to shine.

My Bard PC that I play is good at Diplomacy and Perform. He is decent at many other skills. Including 6 different knowledge skills. Generally speaking though, I try to avoid being better at Knowledge (Nature) then the Druid in the party. I have the skill points, and the Int bonus to really compete in that area if I wanted to. But why wouldn't the Druid be better at that skill? As a player, I leave that niche to the Druid.

Now if the Druid chose to only drop 5 ranks into the skill, over the 17 levels we have been playing, then I wouldn't have an compunctions about being better at that skill. Obviously it isn't important enough to the PC to keep improving it.

(Yes I know the value of some skills is debatable. You could argue that a Druid needs a bunch of other skills more then Knowledge (Nature). Remember that it is all campaign dependent. Our campaign is heavy RP light combat. I also have my PC step back and not handle NPC interactions when it is something like our Wizard talking to a cartel of NPC wizards. I may play the socially focused character, but everyone enjoys being the point of contact at times.)

 

[Stone Angel]

Niche Protection. lol. I have never even thought of this. I mean now that I look back I guess I tend to see adventuring parties as a single unit and not as group of individuals. Where the units many skills overlap and supercede the individuals faults.

The Seraph of Earth and Stone

 

[Driddle]

Generally speaking though, I try to avoid being better at Knowledge (Nature) then the Druid in the party. I have the skill points, and the Int bonus to really compete in that area if I wanted to. But why wouldn't the Druid be better at that skill? As a player, I leave that niche to the Druid.

An interesting perspective. Do you hold it in life as well?
(Peanut Gallery, in one voice: "No, you ninny! This is a GAAAAAAME!!!")

I believe in being the best I can be at whatever I want to be best at -- in game, or in life. Only by being the best me possible can I help others.
The other guy's expectations are *his* responsibility, not mine.

 

[Doug McCrae]

No, I don't think niche protection is important. I think it's outmoded, annoying and responsible for most of the rules exceptions that have endured unfixed from past versions of D&D to the current one, such as turning undead and bardic knowledge.

What does niche protection have to do with the particular mechanics used?

 

[WayneLigon]

It could be annoying if that was the rogue's main function in the party.
Don't rub another man's rhubarb.