A little thing called "Talking". [Archive] - Wizards Community

A little thing called "Talking". [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Mherduwynn
11-16-06, 01:44 PM It's come to this Factionmaster's attention that some groups have been having a lot of trouble getting through certain adventures because some combats seem stacked against them or "unwinnable". I've been as supportive as I can about this and taken to heart a few of the suggestions made. In a couple of instances, the adventures have been a bit harsh and if I had it to write over again, I might pare certain encounters back.

However, I've also noticed a trend that seems to pervade most (but not all) of these D&D near-death experiences. The combats most people complain about are almost always the ones that can be (and SHOULD BE) completely avoided through diplomacy or even just good ild fashioned ~talking~.

Without posting spoilers, let me just say this. There's a reason police forces keep negotiators on staff. There's a reason ambassadors exist. And there's a reason Bards belong in the game (much as some of you may feel it's a waste of a class, I assure you it is not).

Every encounter in real life doesn't come down to combat; the same holds true in each and every Covenant of Light adventure. Parley, discussion, or just actually taking a moment to be compassionate now and then can and will get PCs out of a world of pain.

Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood Lighter,
-August
Randall Montgomery
11-16-06, 02:42 PM While I understand where you're coming from, and agree wholeheartedly, I've found that in most cases, groups that do use diplomatic resolutions don't get full XP/GP compared to those who just use straight brute-force to get through the mod. This is especially frustraiting for me, because you would think that the creativity and role-playing necessary to execute a successful diplomatic encounter would be rewarded rather than penalized. I personally would love to see more encounters that can be won by stealth or diplomacy as opposed to simply fighting through, but it's hard to recommend such tactics when your character's get penalized for it.
bronzmonkee
11-16-06, 03:36 PM Without posting spoilers, let me just say this. There's a reason police forces keep negotiators on staff. There's a reason ambassadors exist. And there's a reason Bards belong in the game (much as some of you may feel it's a waste of a class, I assure you it is not).

We did try diplomacy. Despite postive modifiers for roleplaying and an action point spent, we still rolled badly, so the NPC wasted us. The NPC's initial state was Hostile and we did have the penalty for fast Diplomacy, so perhaps that was in error.

As a writer there are a few things that you can do to assist the DM (and indirectly the PC's). Clearly spell out when an NPC is not supposed to fight. Sure, if the PC's attack or provoke, then let 'em have it, but not before. Have the NPC start in a Neutral or Unfriendly stance, rather than Hostile. Give the PC's time to make an unrushed Diplomacy check. Best of all would be to allow a plot relavent line of persuasion to automatically succeed rather than forcing a Diplomacy check.

Hope this helps for next time.
Mherduwynn
11-16-06, 04:19 PM This is supposed to be a general thread for roleplaying; PLEASE avoid anything resembling spoilers. I would prefer we not discuss particulars here as I really only intended this forum as an advisory one.

That said, I see your point and gratefully thank you for your advice. I will try very hard to be a better writer in the future.

-August
Mherduwynn
11-16-06, 04:23 PM I agree fully with the idea of full experience for module encounters solved through word of mouth rather than force of arms. All of the Covenant of Light scenarios, as well as those of my excellent fellow Factionmasters, allow for "defeat" as the determining factor for both experience and gold gained.

As the 3.5 definition of defeat clearly states that defeat can include active defusing of a situation through diplomacy, roleplaying, and creative problem solving, smooth-talking PCs should be in good shape there.

Please, everyone feel free to add your thoughts here.
KShaver
11-16-06, 04:43 PM We did try diplomacy. Despite postive modifiers for roleplaying and an action point spent, we still rolled badly, so the NPC wasted us. The NPC's initial state was Hostile and we did have the penalty for fast Diplomacy, so perhaps that was in error.

Diplomacy in particular is one skill where no two players seem to have the same skill check in. Take those paladin and cleric diplomats, while it is a class skill for them, and while they are likely to have some charisma, they just aren't going to have check much over +7 at 2nd level. Even the paladin who gets some of the synergies as class skills just doesn't have the skill points to use them. A bard (or marshall) on the other hand might have a +14 or so (+20 easily obtainable for a marshall at 2nd level), but this is the exception and not the norm. This is particularly true when you look at the stereotype of a party's normal make up, one priest, one fighter, one wizard, and one rogue. Sure, two of those would be decent at diplomacy, but they aren't likely to have the modifiers on the higher end.

So assuming one is a lot more likely to see a character with a +7 diplomacy skill rather than a character with a +14 or higher diplomacy skill the module should take this into account. That means even with an action point one can't expect a 2nd level group to break a DC 20 diplomacy check w/o a little bit of luck, and if the situation requries a rushed roll then forget about it. You can't always expect the DM to give the party bonuses for good roleplaying, and even then such bonuses generally aren't going to push them over that DC 25 or DC 30 mark. The DCs need to be set at realistic levels for your average party, sure higher marks can be set for larger rewards, but a party getting pounded by an EL 2-4 levels over them for not being able to make a rushed DC20-25 diplomacy check at 2nd level can be a bit harsh.
Herrbard
11-16-06, 04:45 PM August, I whole-heartedly agree. I think that most players who come over from Living Greyhawk are the ones more likely to try and fight through to make sure they earn every ounce of gold and access. I can't tell you how many times I've been frustrated while filling out ARs in that campaign when the players don't get full gold because they talked their way out of something rather than killing the enemies and taking their stuff. With Xen'drik, we have the opportunity to make role-palying mean something, and it pleases this old player that the factionmasters have taken this to heart.
smerwin29
11-16-06, 06:49 PM It is always a delicate line to walk writing an RPGA adventure. If you don't put enough instruction in, DMs have to wing it a little, and while most I have seen do a great job, you get some interesting results. If you put too much instruction in, the DM gets overwhelmed by the amount of text, and you are back to the same as above.

Sometimes the best solution is for the writer to clearly state their intentions for the encounter rather than a bunch of instructions. In a roleplaying-intensive campaign, it might be more important for the writer to say, "This combat can be avoided if the PCs attempt diplomacy and show the token of affection they received from NPC X in the first encounter."

However, and I cannot stress this enough, players cannot expect to have characters with no ranks in diplomacy solve problems by using diplomacy. I love pure roleplaying, but the skill is there for a reason. This is again part of that line the writer has to walk.

I could go on about this for hours and hours, and have before, but I will save everyone the torture . . .

I will say this, though. The use of adventure questions in the D&D Campaigns allows the Factionmasters to easily reward PCs based on criteria like successfully completing an encounter through diplomacy without worrying about losing GPs or XPs.

Shawn
Randall Montgomery
11-17-06, 10:55 AM I agree fully with the idea of full experience for module encounters solved through word of mouth rather than force of arms. All of the Covenant of Light scenarios, as well as those of my excellent fellow Factionmasters, allow for "defeat" as the determining factor for both experience and gold gained.

As the 3.5 definition of defeat clearly states that defeat can include active defusing of a situation through diplomacy, roleplaying, and creative problem solving, smooth-talking PCs should be in good shape there.

Please, everyone feel free to add your thoughts here.

The reason I mentioned this is because one of the Faction mods I have played DID penalize us for using diplomacy. Our DM had played the mod previously with his group, going straight combat, and got full XP/GP for the mod. Our group did everything the same as his, except that we solved the final encounter through diplomacy (because of some REALLY unfortunant rolls, it took like 5 diplomacy rolls and a bluff check, but we did it), and we ended up not getting max. While in the long run, a hundred GP and XP don't mean much, I was extremely annoyed that I designed a well rounded character who could talk as well as fight, that I role-played to the best of my ability, and "fought" like heck to win the battle without resorting to violence, and I got penalized for it. While I still love my character, and fully intend to use her skills and abilities to their greatest effect, this experience has left something of a sour taste in my mouth.

And as an aside, my LG group has already vowed never to talk our way through a module again after getting hosed in three different modules. This is another reason why I was so annoyed with the Xendrik mod, because I had believed this was supposed to have been changed. [/rant] :(
smerwin29
11-17-06, 11:31 AM Well, in the early XE mods, the XP and GP totals tied to the questions were not decided by the Factionmasters, but by HQ. From this point forward, we have a new process for module editing and review, and we will be keeping a lookout for that.

However, there may be times when different solutions to an encounter may not be considered optimal, and may garner different XP and GP totals. That's just the nature of the campaign and the Adventure Question method.

Also be aware that "doing everything the same as another group" does not necessarily mean the same rewards. Certain conditions that take place within a battle might mean different rewards, even if both instances won the encounter through combat.

Shawn
Crimson Codex Guy
Japangirl
11-17-06, 07:44 PM Use diplomacy, bluff, and intimidate in combination in LG to make people surrender. I've noticed on my bard that it really does work most of the time. Full access is then guaranteed, and if you get less XP you at least get to keep your character in play for longer. Surrendered foes can't expect to keep their equipment :).
lordtiberiusfoxx
11-19-06, 02:21 AM Let's not forget the power of roleplaying and the DM's best friend rule here. If the PCs aren't roleplaying, pick up their dice, and say "I diplomisize him," then they deserve to fail because they reduce the game to miniatures combat.

On the other hand, players who roleplay their diplomacy encounters who make an effort to stay in character and give a shirtless Jim Kirk speech to win over NPCs should be rewarded with heavy circumstance bonuses. Now I'm not saying that what they say has to be good; many players have charisma scores far below their characters. Again, its effort and roleplaying that count here.

So a decent diplomacy check, plus aid to diplomacy, plus an action die, plus DM's-Best-Friend-Circumstance-Bonus-'Cause-I'm-William Shatner-And-My-Shirt's-Off=Very high diplomacy check.

Tiberius Foxx
"Light... Give me Power!" -- King Mickey, KHII
Herrbard
11-19-06, 07:44 AM So a decent diplomacy check, plus aid to diplomacy, plus an action die, plus DM's-Best-Friend-Circumstance-Bonus-'Cause-I'm-William Shatner-And-My-Shirt's-Off=Very high diplomacy check.

Tiberius Foxx

Anyone else find it peculiar that someone named Tiberius is telling people to emulate James T. Kirk? Just a thought... ;)
smerwin29
11-19-06, 08:45 AM Not so much peculiar as disturbing . . . :-D
Mherduwynn
11-19-06, 09:26 PM My eyes!!!!

x_x

:)

-A
lordtiberiusfoxx
11-20-06, 12:52 PM :P

Tiberius Foxx
"Light, give me POWER!" -King Mickey, KHII
Madfox11
11-21-06, 08:38 AM That cleric or paladin might have a +7 Diplomacy check, but your fellow PCs can try aid another to raise that +7. In my experience, players also have a tendency to forget that in many circumstances you can take 10 even on skills like Diplomacy and Gather Information.
lordtiberiusfoxx
11-22-06, 01:44 AM Okay, let's see what we can do then... So for arguement's sake, let's take a 2nd level party without a marshall, and have them talk down an openly hostile NPC to merely unfriendly. The DC is 20.

-10 For rushed Diplomacy
5 for skill ranks
2 for charisma modifier
2 for the first dude going "yeah what he said" and aiding
2 for the second dude going "I got shineys for ya!" and aiding
4 for the action die roll
2 for roleplaying a great speech and the DM thinks you're awsome

This leaves a die roll of 13 to make the DC. Not enough to take 10, but certainly achievable. Please note however that in this calculation it puts the NPC into a state to take the bribe and likely use it to bribe a guard and arrest the PC later... or some other not so nice action that an unfriendly would cause.

Tiberius Foxx
"Light, give me power!" -King Mickey, KHII

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mherduwynn 11-16-06, 01:44 PM	It's come to this Factionmaster's attention that some groups have been having a lot of trouble getting through certain adventures because some combats seem stacked against them or "unwinnable". I've been as supportive as I can about this and taken to heart a few of the suggestions made. In a couple of instances, the adventures have been a bit harsh and if I had it to write over again, I might pare certain encounters back. However, I've also noticed a trend that seems to pervade most (but not all) of these D&D near-death experiences. The combats most people complain about are almost always the ones that can be (and SHOULD BE) completely avoided through diplomacy or even just good ild fashioned ~talking~. Without posting spoilers, let me just say this. There's a reason police forces keep negotiators on staff. There's a reason ambassadors exist. And there's a reason Bards belong in the game (much as some of you may feel it's a waste of a class, I assure you it is not). Every encounter in real life doesn't come down to combat; the same holds true in each and every Covenant of Light adventure. Parley, discussion, or just actually taking a moment to be compassionate now and then can and will get PCs out of a world of pain. Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood Lighter, -August
Randall Montgomery 11-16-06, 02:42 PM	While I understand where you're coming from, and agree wholeheartedly, I've found that in most cases, groups that do use diplomatic resolutions don't get full XP/GP compared to those who just use straight brute-force to get through the mod. This is especially frustraiting for me, because you would think that the creativity and role-playing necessary to execute a successful diplomatic encounter would be rewarded rather than penalized. I personally would love to see more encounters that can be won by stealth or diplomacy as opposed to simply fighting through, but it's hard to recommend such tactics when your character's get penalized for it.
bronzmonkee 11-16-06, 03:36 PM	Without posting spoilers, let me just say this. There's a reason police forces keep negotiators on staff. There's a reason ambassadors exist. And there's a reason Bards belong in the game (much as some of you may feel it's a waste of a class, I assure you it is not). We did try diplomacy. Despite postive modifiers for roleplaying and an action point spent, we still rolled badly, so the NPC wasted us. The NPC's initial state was Hostile and we did have the penalty for fast Diplomacy, so perhaps that was in error. As a writer there are a few things that you can do to assist the DM (and indirectly the PC's). Clearly spell out when an NPC is not supposed to fight. Sure, if the PC's attack or provoke, then let 'em have it, but not before. Have the NPC start in a Neutral or Unfriendly stance, rather than Hostile. Give the PC's time to make an unrushed Diplomacy check. Best of all would be to allow a plot relavent line of persuasion to automatically succeed rather than forcing a Diplomacy check. Hope this helps for next time.
Mherduwynn 11-16-06, 04:19 PM	This is supposed to be a general thread for roleplaying; PLEASE avoid anything resembling spoilers. I would prefer we not discuss particulars here as I really only intended this forum as an advisory one. That said, I see your point and gratefully thank you for your advice. I will try very hard to be a better writer in the future. -August
Mherduwynn 11-16-06, 04:23 PM	I agree fully with the idea of full experience for module encounters solved through word of mouth rather than force of arms. All of the Covenant of Light scenarios, as well as those of my excellent fellow Factionmasters, allow for "defeat" as the determining factor for both experience and gold gained. As the 3.5 definition of defeat clearly states that defeat can include active defusing of a situation through diplomacy, roleplaying, and creative problem solving, smooth-talking PCs should be in good shape there. Please, everyone feel free to add your thoughts here.
KShaver 11-16-06, 04:43 PM	We did try diplomacy. Despite postive modifiers for roleplaying and an action point spent, we still rolled badly, so the NPC wasted us. The NPC's initial state was Hostile and we did have the penalty for fast Diplomacy, so perhaps that was in error. Diplomacy in particular is one skill where no two players seem to have the same skill check in. Take those paladin and cleric diplomats, while it is a class skill for them, and while they are likely to have some charisma, they just aren't going to have check much over +7 at 2nd level. Even the paladin who gets some of the synergies as class skills just doesn't have the skill points to use them. A bard (or marshall) on the other hand might have a +14 or so (+20 easily obtainable for a marshall at 2nd level), but this is the exception and not the norm. This is particularly true when you look at the stereotype of a party's normal make up, one priest, one fighter, one wizard, and one rogue. Sure, two of those would be decent at diplomacy, but they aren't likely to have the modifiers on the higher end. So assuming one is a lot more likely to see a character with a +7 diplomacy skill rather than a character with a +14 or higher diplomacy skill the module should take this into account. That means even with an action point one can't expect a 2nd level group to break a DC 20 diplomacy check w/o a little bit of luck, and if the situation requries a rushed roll then forget about it. You can't always expect the DM to give the party bonuses for good roleplaying, and even then such bonuses generally aren't going to push them over that DC 25 or DC 30 mark. The DCs need to be set at realistic levels for your average party, sure higher marks can be set for larger rewards, but a party getting pounded by an EL 2-4 levels over them for not being able to make a rushed DC20-25 diplomacy check at 2nd level can be a bit harsh.
Herrbard 11-16-06, 04:45 PM	August, I whole-heartedly agree. I think that most players who come over from Living Greyhawk are the ones more likely to try and fight through to make sure they earn every ounce of gold and access. I can't tell you how many times I've been frustrated while filling out ARs in that campaign when the players don't get full gold because they talked their way out of something rather than killing the enemies and taking their stuff. With Xen'drik, we have the opportunity to make role-palying mean something, and it pleases this old player that the factionmasters have taken this to heart.
smerwin29 11-16-06, 06:49 PM	It is always a delicate line to walk writing an RPGA adventure. If you don't put enough instruction in, DMs have to wing it a little, and while most I have seen do a great job, you get some interesting results. If you put too much instruction in, the DM gets overwhelmed by the amount of text, and you are back to the same as above. Sometimes the best solution is for the writer to clearly state their intentions for the encounter rather than a bunch of instructions. In a roleplaying-intensive campaign, it might be more important for the writer to say, "This combat can be avoided if the PCs attempt diplomacy and show the token of affection they received from NPC X in the first encounter." However, and I cannot stress this enough, players cannot expect to have characters with no ranks in diplomacy solve problems by using diplomacy. I love pure roleplaying, but the skill is there for a reason. This is again part of that line the writer has to walk. I could go on about this for hours and hours, and have before, but I will save everyone the torture . . . I will say this, though. The use of adventure questions in the D&D Campaigns allows the Factionmasters to easily reward PCs based on criteria like successfully completing an encounter through diplomacy without worrying about losing GPs or XPs. Shawn
Randall Montgomery 11-17-06, 10:55 AM	I agree fully with the idea of full experience for module encounters solved through word of mouth rather than force of arms. All of the Covenant of Light scenarios, as well as those of my excellent fellow Factionmasters, allow for "defeat" as the determining factor for both experience and gold gained. As the 3.5 definition of defeat clearly states that defeat can include active defusing of a situation through diplomacy, roleplaying, and creative problem solving, smooth-talking PCs should be in good shape there. Please, everyone feel free to add your thoughts here. The reason I mentioned this is because one of the Faction mods I have played DID penalize us for using diplomacy. Our DM had played the mod previously with his group, going straight combat, and got full XP/GP for the mod. Our group did everything the same as his, except that we solved the final encounter through diplomacy (because of some REALLY unfortunant rolls, it took like 5 diplomacy rolls and a bluff check, but we did it), and we ended up not getting max. While in the long run, a hundred GP and XP don't mean much, I was extremely annoyed that I designed a well rounded character who could talk as well as fight, that I role-played to the best of my ability, and "fought" like heck to win the battle without resorting to violence, and I got penalized for it. While I still love my character, and fully intend to use her skills and abilities to their greatest effect, this experience has left something of a sour taste in my mouth. And as an aside, my LG group has already vowed never to talk our way through a module again after getting hosed in three different modules. This is another reason why I was so annoyed with the Xendrik mod, because I had believed this was supposed to have been changed. [/rant] :(
smerwin29 11-17-06, 11:31 AM	Well, in the early XE mods, the XP and GP totals tied to the questions were not decided by the Factionmasters, but by HQ. From this point forward, we have a new process for module editing and review, and we will be keeping a lookout for that. However, there may be times when different solutions to an encounter may not be considered optimal, and may garner different XP and GP totals. That's just the nature of the campaign and the Adventure Question method. Also be aware that "doing everything the same as another group" does not necessarily mean the same rewards. Certain conditions that take place within a battle might mean different rewards, even if both instances won the encounter through combat. Shawn Crimson Codex Guy
Japangirl 11-17-06, 07:44 PM	Use diplomacy, bluff, and intimidate in combination in LG to make people surrender. I've noticed on my bard that it really does work most of the time. Full access is then guaranteed, and if you get less XP you at least get to keep your character in play for longer. Surrendered foes can't expect to keep their equipment :).
lordtiberiusfoxx 11-19-06, 02:21 AM	Let's not forget the power of roleplaying and the DM's best friend rule here. If the PCs aren't roleplaying, pick up their dice, and say "I diplomisize him," then they deserve to fail because they reduce the game to miniatures combat. On the other hand, players who roleplay their diplomacy encounters who make an effort to stay in character and give a shirtless Jim Kirk speech to win over NPCs should be rewarded with heavy circumstance bonuses. Now I'm not saying that what they say has to be good; many players have charisma scores far below their characters. Again, its effort and roleplaying that count here. So a decent diplomacy check, plus aid to diplomacy, plus an action die, plus DM's-Best-Friend-Circumstance-Bonus-'Cause-I'm-William Shatner-And-My-Shirt's-Off=Very high diplomacy check. Tiberius Foxx "Light... Give me Power!" -- King Mickey, KHII
Herrbard 11-19-06, 07:44 AM	So a decent diplomacy check, plus aid to diplomacy, plus an action die, plus DM's-Best-Friend-Circumstance-Bonus-'Cause-I'm-William Shatner-And-My-Shirt's-Off=Very high diplomacy check. Tiberius Foxx Anyone else find it peculiar that someone named Tiberius is telling people to emulate James T. Kirk? Just a thought... ;)
smerwin29 11-19-06, 08:45 AM	Not so much peculiar as disturbing . . . :-D
Mherduwynn 11-19-06, 09:26 PM	My eyes!!!! x_x :) -A
lordtiberiusfoxx 11-20-06, 12:52 PM	:P Tiberius Foxx "Light, give me POWER!" -King Mickey, KHII
Madfox11 11-21-06, 08:38 AM	That cleric or paladin might have a +7 Diplomacy check, but your fellow PCs can try aid another to raise that +7. In my experience, players also have a tendency to forget that in many circumstances you can take 10 even on skills like Diplomacy and Gather Information.
lordtiberiusfoxx 11-22-06, 01:44 AM	Okay, let's see what we can do then... So for arguement's sake, let's take a 2nd level party without a marshall, and have them talk down an openly hostile NPC to merely unfriendly. The DC is 20. -10 For rushed Diplomacy 5 for skill ranks 2 for charisma modifier 2 for the first dude going "yeah what he said" and aiding 2 for the second dude going "I got shineys for ya!" and aiding 4 for the action die roll 2 for roleplaying a great speech and the DM thinks you're awsome This leaves a die roll of 13 to make the DC. Not enough to take 10, but certainly achievable. Please note however that in this calculation it puts the NPC into a state to take the bribe and likely use it to bribe a guard and arrest the PC later... or some other not so nice action that an unfriendly would cause. Tiberius Foxx "Light, give me power!" -King Mickey, KHII