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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Goddess FallenAngel" data-source="post: 4120592" data-attributes="member: 11434">A long time ago, back in the early days of D&D 3e, I played a rogue with a very high diplomacy. Being the type of personality she was, she used the skill to insult people as often as she used it to negotiate and calm people down (long story involving character personality, roleplaying, the campaign, and the gaming group, and really unessential for this discussion – we basically started a war). We rolled in reverse on the <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm#influencingNpcAttitudes" target="_blank">Influencing NPC Attitudes</a> table to see how much she could enrage someone. (The die roll was always accompanied by roleplaying, if that matters in your opinion.)Disclaimer: I never got any bonuses for skills, attacks, damage, etc for this use of the skill - it wasn’t taunt. It was just for roleplaying purposes and didn’t affect the mechanics of the game beyond the changed attitude of the NPC – which can be done with a simple botched Diplomacy roll anyway, per the rules. Now that the disclaimer is out of the way – let’s set aside the issue of game mechanics with this… that’s not what I’m curious about, and I don’t want to devolve into a discussion of what the mechanics of this should be.What I would like to know, for discussion purposes, is if you would allow something like that in your game. My viewpoint is that if you know the exact right thing to say in any given situation (reflected by a high Diplomacy skill check), you would also have to know the exact wrong thing to say, if for no other reason that to avoid saying it.What do you think?</blockquote>

Verification