What can you do with Diplomacy?

[Mistwell]

What can a diplomacy check achieve in a hostile encounter?

The DMG has the following to say about Diplomacy DC checks (DMG Pg. 31, Chapter 2: Using the Rules, Section Title: Skill and Ability Checks, Table 2-5: Difficult Class Examples):

15 – Make indifferent people friendly (we knew this already);
25 – Persuade the Dragon that has captured you that it would be a good idea to let you go.

DC 25 is moving a hostile target to a friendly target. So, we can deduce from this that the friendly attitude is sufficient to gain your own release from captivity. Also, since no conditions for release are mentioned (since it is a “good idea” already to let you go), we can assume it is not a conditioned release (but more on this later).

That’s a pretty bare-bones outline of what you can do, but I think it is enough to go on for the creation of a list of expected reactions from the use of diplomacy during a hostile encounter.

For each scenario, assume the target starts out as hostile towards all party members, including you, and you are the only one trying Diplomacy as an action. Assume also that you and at least one other party member are an equal distance from the target, and you and this fellow party member are tactically equally appealing as a subject for the targets next attack. You attempt a Diplomacy check against the target, asking (in various manners, depending on what the player decides to say) that the target leave you and your party alone, let you and your party leave in peace, and perhaps help you and your party in a task.

In each scenario, you make one Diplomacy check to change the target's attitude, and another if there is further negotiation over conditions or assistance in a task, to see who gains the advantage in such further negotiations.

The possible attitude results are as follows (and this can easily be charted in excel, if anyone is interested):

Hostile: The target attacks you over the other party members, since your words merely made them even more upset at you. The target will not likely be satisfied until you are dead.

Unfriendly: The target attacks the other party member first. If you leave the target alone, the target will attack all other party members prior to attacking you. The target may let you (and you alone) go, though there will be major conditions for such a release, such as requiring that you give the target several valuable items, and/or perform a challenging task for the target, and with no help from the target (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions). If you attack the target (or attack again, after the target’s attitude has moved back to this result after an attack), the target moves back to hostile regarding you, and will attack you as under the hostile result. If a target considers you unfriendly and attacks you, the target may be satisfied with just knocking you unconscious and/or capturing you, and taking your valuables.

Indifferent: The targets attitude towards the rest of the party is unfriendly, in addition to the target being Indifferent towards you. The target may cease attacking the party, as long as the party does not attack the target (or attack the target any further, after the target’s attitude has moved back to this result after an attack). If the party attacks the target, the targets attitude moves back to hostile regarding the rest of the party. Otherwise, the target may let the rest of the party go, though there will be major conditions for such a release, such as requiring that the party give the target several valuable items each, and/or perform a challenging task for the target, and with no help from the target (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over the task and conditions). If you leave the target alone, the target will let you go, but with some minor conditions (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions), such as requiring that you give the target one valuable item, and/or perform a challenging task with some help from the target, or a relatively non-challenging task without help from the target. If you attack the target (or attack again, after the target’s attitude has moved back to this result after an attack), the target moves back to unfriendly regarding you, and will behave as under the unfriendly result towards you. If a target considers you indifferent and attacks you, the target will be satisfied with just knocking you unconscious and/or capturing you, and will take at least your weapons and tools that could enable escape.

Friendly: The targets attitude towards the rest of the party is indifferent, in addition to the target being friendly towards you. The target will cease attacking the party, as long as the party does not attack the target. If the rest of the party attacks the target, the targets attitude moves back to unfriendly regarding the rest of the party. Otherwise, the target will let the rest of the party go, but with some minor conditions (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions), such as requiring each other party member give the target one valuable item, and/or perform a challenging task with some help from the target, or a relatively non-challenging task without help from the target. If you leave the target alone, the target will let you go without conditions, or will let you go and help you in a task you request, with varying conditions depending on the importance and risk involved in the task (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions). If you attack the target, the target moves back to indifferent regarding you, and will behave as under the indifferent result towards you. If a target considers you friendly and attacks you, the target will be satisfied with just knocking you unconscious and/or capturing you, may hold your weapons and tools that could enable escape pending the end of the encounter, and may help you in a minor task you request as an apology for the attack (perhaps requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over further assistance).

Helpful: The targets attitude towards the rest of the party is friendly, in addition to the target being helpful towards you. The target will cease attacking the party, as long as the party does not attack the target. If the rest of the party attacks the target, the targets attitude moves back to indifferent regarding the rest of the party. Otherwise, the target will let the party go without conditions, or will let the party go and help the party in a task they request, with varying conditions depending on the importance and risk involved in the task (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions). If you leave the target alone, the target will let you go and help you in a minor task you request without conditions, or a major task you request with conditions (though less harsh conditions than would be required of the rest of the party for such a task, and requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over conditions). If you attack the target, the target moves back to indifferent regarding you (since a target will never remain friendly or helpful towards a person who attacks the target), and will behave as under the indifferent result towards you. If a target considers you helpful and attacks you, the target will be satisfied with just knocking you unconscious and/or capturing you (though will not remove any of your equipment) pending the end of the encounter, and will help you in a minor task you request, or perhaps even a major task, as an apology for the attack (requiring a second opposed Diplomacy check to see who gets the advantage in this negotiation over task assistance).

What do you think? Any advice, changes, questions, comments, or requests?

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

Very nice... I think a list of modifiers (i.e. of traditionally enemy/friendly race, obviously of similar/dissimilar alignment, how dangerous the party looks vs. sense of self-preservation, parley in native language/non-native language/gestures only, etc.) would be a logical addition.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I think the big thing is that a diplomacy check should not ignore the pre-existing circumstances. For instance, if you're talking about a used car salesman, then it's quite likely that in every situation except for hostile, he's going to try to sell you a car. Hell, he may even try to sell you a car if he's hostile (just one which is a total lemon, and which he's going to attempt to get 400% of his normal asking price for).

OTOH, if you're talking about professional mercenaries protecting a holy shrine, then nothing short of a helpful result will let you approach the shrine (and anything below friendly will probably result in you being driven off by force). If they're neutral for instance, then they don't care enough about you to not kill or attack you for money.

Your suggestions work for someone who currently doesn't have much of a purpose.

I think that the 'attitude' of NPCs towards PCs has to be weighed against other factors by the DM. I don't think that the DM should look at the results of a diplomacy check and say "oh well, I guess the dragon hands over his hoard", nor do I think the DM should say "oh well, regardless of what you say, the dragon still mercilessly attacks you and CDG's you after the fight". There has to be a middle ground.

 

[Emiricol]

Plenty of guards are Friendly to one or more inmates. Doesn't mean they let them go! And many doctors, I imagine, do not give their friends (Friendly) free medical work, but may well tell such a friend when it is time to go in for an office visit (on the clock!)

So, yes I think results should be weighed against the context of the situation.

 

[Mistwell]

Diplomacy

I agree the context of a situation matters. But that is what circumstance modifiers are for, detailed on DMG pg. 30. You can modify the DC by anywhere from 2 to 20 (and -20 to -2), based on circumstances, though usually by no more than +2 or -2.

I just wanted to establish a basic list to go off of, which you are of course free to modify further based on a circumstance modifier. It's just a lot easier to get to a final DC if you have something more to go on, like this chart.

However, I wouldn't get too extreme with circumstance modifiers, since we have an established baseline in DC 25 being sufficient to persuade the dragon that has captured you that it would be a good idea to let you go. If the dragon is particularly displeased, I would add a +2 to the DC. If they are particularly pleased, I would subtract a -2 from the DC. But I wouldn't modify it by +20 or -20, since I think that would be too extreme given the baseline DC 25.

The goal is to give a bit more certainty to the Diplomacy skill, which encourages its use (as an alternative to constant hack and slash tactics).

Right now, I believe many players do not choose to use Diplomacy during hostile encounters as often as they would if there was as much certainty to its use as there was in using a sword. A fighter knows that if he rolls high on a d20, his first hit with the sword is likely to hit most creatures. However, the character with many ranks and bonuses to Diplomacy doesn't have that kind of assurance. Because of the fuzzy "it feels like a DC X" particularized target DCs for Diplomacy system that lacks such a chart, players would naturally feel like it isn't worth building up this skill. Why build it up if it relies on the DMs mood at the time, and how the DM thinks this particular creature thinks in reaction to that particular situation at that moment?

I think it is a far better system, for both the players and the DM, if everyone knew what various results from a die roll will mean, prior to rolling that die. It shouldn't be an ability based solely on DM judgment calls made on the fly, because that is an unfair burden to the DM (who has a lot of calculating to do quickly, if they want an accurate result), and to the players (who should know before hand whether it is even worth trying to use the ability, and shouldn't be bound by inaccurate DC targets because a DM was forced to either slow the game down to accurately work out a complex DC, or use fuzzy guesswork and likely get the DC wrong).

 

[S'mon]

Plenty of guards are Friendly to one or more inmates. Doesn't mean they let them go! And many doctors, I imagine, do not give their friends (Friendly) free medical work, but may well tell such a friend when it is time to go in for an office visit (on the clock!)

So, yes I think results should be weighed against the context of the situation.

I agree, I think it's important not to use a diplomacy check as a charm/domination effect. By analogy to the prison guard, a red dragon could be 'friendly' and still eat you for lunch - he might save you til last, he might even apologise, but he's still a red dragon. OTOH if given a plausible reason _why_ he should let you go ("so I can bring all my friends to the barbecue"), that might work. I think beings with very high Wisdom will be less affected by the results of diplomacy checks; they can maintain a certain detachment ("sure, the bard is charming, but it would be illogical to give him my treasure hoard"). A Will save opposed to the Diplomacy check might be appropriate in some cases.

 

[GamerMan12]

I think you have got the wrong end of the stick with diplomacy.
It is NOT DC25 to move a hostile target to a friendly one.

In a hostile encounter, that is someone about to attack you, diplomacy would very rarely accomplish anything. It is a circumstance bonus to it of -20 or higher.

In the example given of someone being captured by a dragon, and it being DC25 to talk your way out, that is where the Dragon is nice and secure, as you are locked up or tied up and he may be willing to listen to what you have to offer him. After all he hasn't killed you outright, so he may be hoping for ransom or a good reason to let you go, the circumstances allow diplomacy to be used.

The circumstances of a hostile party encountering your party, is where there is not the opportunity to allow a normal attempt at diplomacy.
I conceed that there could be various degrees of hostility and so a group that is only nomimally hostile, say on general principles, may have only a -10 or less circumstance bonus to diplomacy, so high or Epic level characters could have a chance to sway them.

I make players have many diplomacy rolls IMC, but that is during non-hostile encounter situations. You will not get a diplomacy roll against a group of bandits intent on robbing you, to stop that happening. Maybe after you are defeated, they may be persuaded not to kill you, but if their purpose is looting, sweet talking is not going to change their minds.

GM12

 

[Berandor]

Here you are, Mistwell!
Want me to copy/paste the rest of the discussion as well?

Berandor
from Akashic to everyday Diplomat.

 

[Ran]

I also wonder how would we adjudicate what is diplomacy and what is bluff, after all they are pretty close sometimes and I don't like diplomacy being used just for attitudes...

Anyway your idea is nice but I wonder what is diplomacy supposed to work like, afetr all it just takes away roleplaying in many situations, I would rule speak and roll, your speech could modify your roll depending on the way you handle it...

Do you share my problem on dividing them?

 

[Saeviomagy]

I think you have got the wrong end of the stick with diplomacy.
It is NOT DC25 to move a hostile target to a friendly one.

In a hostile encounter, that is someone about to attack you, diplomacy would very rarely accomplish anything. It is a circumstance bonus to it of -20 or higher.

Incorrect. The rules say it's a diplomacy check with a DC of 35 to move a hostile target to a friendly one over the course of a minute of parlay. If you need to do it in a single action, then there's a -10 to your roll. If you make that DC45 roll, then the creature got moved from hostile to friendly. Slapping on a -20 modifier is the equivalent of saying "no, they won't parlay no matter what you say".

However, just because they're friendly doesn't mean they're going to hand over all their treasure and let you past - the reason they attacked you is still present (unless it was just plain nastiness), and you'll need to overcome that. The encounter doesn't go away - it just changes from combat to puzzle solving.

In the example given of someone being captured by a dragon, and it being DC25 to talk your way out, that is where the Dragon is nice and secure, as you are locked up or tied up and he may be willing to listen to what you have to offer him. After all he hasn't killed you outright, so he may be hoping for ransom or a good reason to let you go, the circumstances allow diplomacy to be used.

I'd assume that the DC 25 check is to move an unfriendly dragon to friendly over the course of a minute of discourse. In that sort of situation, making offers of money is probably not necessary. You've won him over with your style and wit, and he's willing to let you go without much of an investment. If he'd been moved to neutral, then I dare say a sweetener would be necessary to secure freedom. If he was moved to helpful, he'd probably send you on your way with some useful advice.

The circumstances of a hostile party encountering your party, is where there is not the opportunity to allow a normal attempt at diplomacy.

The rules for this are present in the book. -10 penalty for a full round diplomacy check.

I conceed that there could be various degrees of hostility and so a group that is only nomimally hostile, say on general principles, may have only a -10 or less circumstance bonus to diplomacy, so high or Epic level characters could have a chance to sway them.

I think you're mistaken here. You don't slap on diplomacy modifiers for creatures because they're hostile. You just say "the creatures are hostile". Taking a look at the chart, hostile is ALREADY the equivalent of "-20 to diplomacy" if we assume that the numbers for a neutral party are the default. Slapping on additional modifiers is just getting silly - it's telling the players "look - quit that stupid diplomacy crap and just kill the monsters I throw at you"

I make players have many diplomacy rolls IMC, but that is during non-hostile encounter situations. You will not get a diplomacy roll against a group of bandits intent on robbing you, to stop that happening. Maybe after you are defeated, they may be persuaded not to kill you, but if their purpose is looting, sweet talking is not going to change their minds.
GM12

Yes, you can get such a diplomacy check. It's in the rules, plain as day. If you disallow it, you're doing the equivalent of telling the fighter that he cannot start a fight with a non-hostile creauture.