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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6099847" data-attributes="member: 4937">Yes, but I hate rabbit-proofing everything because then it feels like meta-gaming against a player, and punishing them for something that isn't really their fault.   Of course, ideally, I take control over the rules set and make sure that none of your bunnies have 'teeth this long', but even so things slip.Yeah, Diplomacy strict RAW and with favorable interpretation is one of those rabbits.I'm not a fan of either solution, but there are a couple you missed, even RAW:a) Not everything is social finessable. You can't charm oozes, plants, animals, many undead, and constructs without extraordinary resources.  For that matter, deaf/mute slaves and possibly anything that doesn't share a common language or means of communication.  There are ways around that, but they are all resources.   But then, designing everything so it isn't socially finessable feels like metagaming to me.b) The terms 'friendly' and 'helpful are poorly defined.  This is the, "You seem like a decent fellow, I hate to kill you ruling."   Just because The Dread Pirate Roberts has socially finessed Inigo Montoya, nothing in the game rules provides for The Dread Pirate Roberts to command Inigo to do anything in particular (or vica versa).  The Dread Pirate Roberts gets a rope thrown down, a nice rest and a chance to learn some backstory while Inigo monologues, but Inigo is still going to kill him because even though he likes him he's still got to obey Vincini (who he fears and feels he has a debt too).   It's really up to the DM to determine how a 'friendly' and 'helpful' creature acts.   Even 'friendly' and 'helpful' creatures aren't subject to mind control.c) The rules allow for the DM to liberally apply circumstance modifiers as suited to the situation:  It's one thing to suggest that there is a fixed DC to socially finessing a stranger's attitude - but what about someone you previously betrayed?   What about a situation where you are basically asking the guy to die for you by showing you favor?  What about someone who knows you killed his daughter?  Don't those situations warrant a circumstance modifier of some sort?   The DM can basically rule zero any bonus or penalty he likes here and it not be metagaming as long as he's consistant.  Arguably though, you are better off taking 'c' and enshrining it into the formal rules.  The other thing I've done is manage magic for skill.  By raw its too easy to invest magic to get large returns on a skill check.  I tend to treat a bonus on a skill check as being worth roughly as much as bonuses to AC, to hit, damage, etc.</blockquote>

Verification