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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What can you do with Diplomacy?
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="Mistwell" data-source="post: 1105645" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p><strong>Diplomacy</strong></p><p></p><p>I'm hearing three problems here, the same two I heard on the Monte Cook board in fact.</p><p></p><p>1. It depends on how well or poorly you role play the situation.</p><p>2. You cannot use Diplomacy in a hostile encounter.</p><p>3. Some creatures are not suseptible to Diplomacy.</p><p></p><p>ONE: "It depends on how well or poorly you role play the situation."</p><p></p><p>The first is the easiest to refute. If you make a skill check depend on a player's role playing ability, you might as well remove the Diplomacy, Bluff, and Intimidate skills from the game. In fact, I don't see much reason to even have a Charisma score. Skills, and all character abilities with rules for that matter, never rely on the role playing ability of a player for them, to function. Skills are as much a function of a character (rather than a player) as the ability to cast a spell or swing a sword. I, a player, cannot effectively fight with a sword, nor can I cast a spell. My character, however, can do those things. Similarly, I do not have a high Charisma, nor do I have high ranks and bonuses and magic giving me a very high Diplomacy score. My character, however, does. My character knows what to say in that situation, whereas I do not.</p><p></p><p>You shoudln't penalize your players for using a skill they themselves are not good at (unless you make your Rogue player tumble around the room for you before allowing his character to do the same). </p><p></p><p>Now, before people choke all over this point, I am NOT saying that the player should not role play the situation. I fully agree that a good DM will play things out, because it is fun, adds color, and overall works well and is part of the game (and I often do so with swinging a sword and casting a spell as well). Nor am I saying role playing has NO impact, since the role playing does influence what goals the character is seeking, how they generally want to achieve those goals, and what goals and methods the opponant is using. </p><p></p><p>However, the RESULT of this role playing situation should come from the die roll modified by the skill ranks and bonuses. If the player says his character is seeking the cessation of hostilities, even if his method of saying it is "Dude, I tell that thing to lay off.", and he gets a 51 on his Diplomacy check (a truly incredible score), the opponant WILL cease hostilities. You can assume that the character said something eloquent, engaging, and compelling. Something you as a DM and your Player cannot possibly fully imagine, because neither of you have approached the realm of being around someone who could speak so well, use body language to such great effect, and overall make the worst people feel good about themselves and you.</p><p></p><p>Of course, you are always free to house rule and Rule 0 diplomacy. But, for what it is worth, the Diplomacy rules (with the DCs presented specifically) are there for a reason, and I know for a fact Monte Cook uses them in his game as I have described (with a minor DC house rule which I am happy to discuss later in the thread if people are interested).</p><p></p><p>TWO: "You cannot use Diplomacy in a hostile encounter."</p><p></p><p>I can see where this is coming from. The 3.5 rules state that Diplomacy takes 10 full rounds (which makes doing it during combat difficult), or one full round action with a -10 modifier. I wrote this chart under the Arcana Unearthed rules, which do not have such a notation (and the chart remains accurate for those rules, and I believe the 3.0 rules as well).</p><p></p><p>However, the section specifically says Diplimacy can be used to head off combat, as a full round action, at -10. That is the modifier for combat....not -20 (though I can see a slightly worse penalty if combat has already begun). The attitude is called HOSTILE. It assumes the thing will attack you, if it can. I think the rule was specifically written with combat in mind. It's a creative way for a player to get through an encounter without hack and slash. If your game isn't about alternatives to combat, then you are of course free to house rule it. But I don't think the skill was written for use ONLY in non-combat situations. It was meant to be more flexible (and as I said earlier, is being used that way by the author of 3.0 DMG, Monte Cook, in his games).</p><p></p><p>THREE: Some creatures are not suseptible to Diplomacy.</p><p></p><p>This simply isn't accurate, at least within the rules. You get an opposed Diplomacy check during a negotiation, so your modifiers from a high charisma do come into play there. But there are no rules for a Wisdom modifier or a will save. It isn't magic, or a mind-influencing supernatural effect. You can modify the target DC based on circumstance modifiers (as mentioned earlier). However, if the DC is hit, the target genuinely changes its mind based on things actually said that would change its mind. All creatures, if they have a mind and can understand you, have desires, and the character has played to those desires (whatever they are). </p><p></p><p>Again, you are always free to house rule the Diplomacy skill. But I don't see why you would punish your players for taking this skill based on some notion that it doesn't work like all other skills.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 1105645, member: 2525"] [b]Diplomacy[/b] I'm hearing three problems here, the same two I heard on the Monte Cook board in fact. 1. It depends on how well or poorly you role play the situation. 2. You cannot use Diplomacy in a hostile encounter. 3. Some creatures are not suseptible to Diplomacy. ONE: "It depends on how well or poorly you role play the situation." The first is the easiest to refute. If you make a skill check depend on a player's role playing ability, you might as well remove the Diplomacy, Bluff, and Intimidate skills from the game. In fact, I don't see much reason to even have a Charisma score. Skills, and all character abilities with rules for that matter, never rely on the role playing ability of a player for them, to function. Skills are as much a function of a character (rather than a player) as the ability to cast a spell or swing a sword. I, a player, cannot effectively fight with a sword, nor can I cast a spell. My character, however, can do those things. Similarly, I do not have a high Charisma, nor do I have high ranks and bonuses and magic giving me a very high Diplomacy score. My character, however, does. My character knows what to say in that situation, whereas I do not. You shoudln't penalize your players for using a skill they themselves are not good at (unless you make your Rogue player tumble around the room for you before allowing his character to do the same). Now, before people choke all over this point, I am NOT saying that the player should not role play the situation. I fully agree that a good DM will play things out, because it is fun, adds color, and overall works well and is part of the game (and I often do so with swinging a sword and casting a spell as well). Nor am I saying role playing has NO impact, since the role playing does influence what goals the character is seeking, how they generally want to achieve those goals, and what goals and methods the opponant is using. However, the RESULT of this role playing situation should come from the die roll modified by the skill ranks and bonuses. If the player says his character is seeking the cessation of hostilities, even if his method of saying it is "Dude, I tell that thing to lay off.", and he gets a 51 on his Diplomacy check (a truly incredible score), the opponant WILL cease hostilities. You can assume that the character said something eloquent, engaging, and compelling. Something you as a DM and your Player cannot possibly fully imagine, because neither of you have approached the realm of being around someone who could speak so well, use body language to such great effect, and overall make the worst people feel good about themselves and you. Of course, you are always free to house rule and Rule 0 diplomacy. But, for what it is worth, the Diplomacy rules (with the DCs presented specifically) are there for a reason, and I know for a fact Monte Cook uses them in his game as I have described (with a minor DC house rule which I am happy to discuss later in the thread if people are interested). TWO: "You cannot use Diplomacy in a hostile encounter." I can see where this is coming from. The 3.5 rules state that Diplomacy takes 10 full rounds (which makes doing it during combat difficult), or one full round action with a -10 modifier. I wrote this chart under the Arcana Unearthed rules, which do not have such a notation (and the chart remains accurate for those rules, and I believe the 3.0 rules as well). However, the section specifically says Diplimacy can be used to head off combat, as a full round action, at -10. That is the modifier for combat....not -20 (though I can see a slightly worse penalty if combat has already begun). The attitude is called HOSTILE. It assumes the thing will attack you, if it can. I think the rule was specifically written with combat in mind. It's a creative way for a player to get through an encounter without hack and slash. If your game isn't about alternatives to combat, then you are of course free to house rule it. But I don't think the skill was written for use ONLY in non-combat situations. It was meant to be more flexible (and as I said earlier, is being used that way by the author of 3.0 DMG, Monte Cook, in his games). THREE: Some creatures are not suseptible to Diplomacy. This simply isn't accurate, at least within the rules. You get an opposed Diplomacy check during a negotiation, so your modifiers from a high charisma do come into play there. But there are no rules for a Wisdom modifier or a will save. It isn't magic, or a mind-influencing supernatural effect. You can modify the target DC based on circumstance modifiers (as mentioned earlier). However, if the DC is hit, the target genuinely changes its mind based on things actually said that would change its mind. All creatures, if they have a mind and can understand you, have desires, and the character has played to those desires (whatever they are). Again, you are always free to house rule the Diplomacy skill. But I don't see why you would punish your players for taking this skill based on some notion that it doesn't work like all other skills. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What can you do with Diplomacy?
Top