|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 16:27:56 GMT
I have a rather simple questions.
let's say that during a land search we get a humanoid encounter of 3 knights and 1 druid.
Is this encounter hostile from the get go, or can role play and diplomacy skills affect whether or not it comes to blows?
Additionally if your group is able to successfully role play out the encounter do you get the xp for the encounter or do you xp on kills only?
|
|
|
Post by Silver on Sept 4, 2013 16:51:31 GMT
They are likely bloodthirsty adventurers that slaughter everything in their path. Diplomacy dc of 50 please
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 17:35:27 GMT
Well you can do diplomacy check but to keep it fair we don't allow role playing out of an encounter because it is hard to keep the game fair amongst multiple groups and DMs
|
|
Del
Heraldry of Nise
Listening to the floating lady in the sky...
Posts: 128
|
Post by Del on Sept 4, 2013 18:39:47 GMT
I fail to see how that is fair at all. Why are we allowing min/maxed meat heads to lumber around killing everything left and right then? Thats not "fair" to the other classes that need to show some modicum of finesse.
Also there can easily be a system of DC checks to make in order to take this route. Failure results in offending the party and having them attack or just straight up leave. If we have a chart in place its a mechanical rule that allows for even distribution and less ad hoc GMing
|
|
|
Post by Lector on Sept 4, 2013 18:46:55 GMT
What if you cast charm person on them? It makes them friendly and that's pretty clearly written out in the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 18:49:03 GMT
I agree with Del here. Otherwise we are encouraging people to only play hack and slash fighters and barbarians and to ignore the charisma stat because it's worthless unless you are a sorceror who needs it for the pew pew. Seeing as this is a very heavy roleplaying game and a lot of RP takes place on the forums I would like to see characters actually be encouraged to have decent charisma and not always jump to the idea of "Let's beat their heads in"
Ahmed is right. If a random encounter comes up with an intelligent race "Humans, Elves, Dwarves etc..." the first response should not necessarily be. "Let's kill them for the XP!!" Even with bandits there are some good alignments that would be adverse to killing them unless they were left absolutely no choise.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 18:51:32 GMT
I agree, I don't see that as a level of fairness rather than just not having a solid rule in place, and technically speaking being able to diplomacy out of certain situations (such as with humanoids that you have at least one language in common with) can actually speed up the process where as combat tends to take a decent amount of time.
For example: You successfully and diplomatically (matching a DC set by the GM running the scene) get the humanoid creatures to surrender their weapons or surrender the field to your group = xp award for winning the encounter
Your diplomacy get's them to not attack you but they warn you that this is their land and they are not giving it up so if they see you again you are dead = no combat but no xp award
Your diplomacy fails and they offended at your statements move to attack = got to combat resolve as normal.
These are just a few out of my ass scenarios I just came up with and i don't see any of them as "unfair" unless we are referring to unfair as "well none of us took anything but combat skills so that is unfair..."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 18:51:53 GMT
What if you cast charm person on them? It makes them friendly and that's pretty clearly written out in the rules. Charm person only lasts a certain amount of time and isn't really effective against higher level encounters and only works against one person at a time and using such a spell on peoples friends will probably piss them off more. So while it may help in some situations it's not a one shot win kind of spell.
|
|
|
Post by Silver on Sept 4, 2013 19:12:20 GMT
While I am totally fine with diplomacy. I can get a +16 to diplomacy roll at level 1. I can also get a reroll. Not that I will be doing that, just saying that its doable and will need to be looked out for.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 19:15:03 GMT
While I am totally fine with diplomacy. I can get a +16 to diplomacy roll at level 1. I can also get a reroll. Not that I will be doing that, just saying that its doable and will need to be looked out for. Of course. No matter what avenue of any game you are in you have to look for people that are trying to break the system and go against the spirit of the game and tell those people no. But just because the system can be broken doesn't mean it should take away a legitimate avenue of RP for people who want to pursue it and use it to play and enjoy the game. Nothing wrong with your concerns though.
|
|
Del
Heraldry of Nise
Listening to the floating lady in the sky...
Posts: 128
|
Post by Del on Sept 4, 2013 19:18:14 GMT
So how is that different from playing a head basher that carries large weapons and dumps all points to str? I would be interested in seeing the +16 diplo build at level one as that min max leaves little room for other stuff unless your a caster whose main state is cha.
Its very hard to tailor rules for those on the extremes and its not something that should become the standard. However we as a group should be aware of the extremes and perhaps mentor those at each end to meet us somewhere in the middle so everyone can have a rich and fun gaming experience.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 19:20:24 GMT
While I am totally fine with diplomacy. I can get a +16 to diplomacy roll at level 1. I can also get a reroll. Not that I will be doing that, just saying that its doable and will need to be looked out for. I understand that, but again, this would only work in specific areas (ie vs humanoid or intelligent creatures that you actually share a language with and communicate with) where as people are breaking the combat avenue and are able to freely use it against any encounter they want. those sort of thing of course should be kept in the stipulations (aka negative modifiers depending on diety, alignment etc...) honestly it will make your character sheet as a whole far more important than "what is your AC, HP, INIT, and AB? Ok good let's play this ROLE PLAYING game."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 19:21:26 GMT
I fail to see how that is fair at all. Why are we allowing min/maxed meat heads to lumber around killing everything left and right then? Thats not "fair" to the other classes that need to show some modicum of finesse. Also there can easily be a system of DC checks to make in order to take this route. Failure results in offending the party and having them attack or just straight up leave. If we have a chart in place its a mechanical rule that allows for even distribution and less ad hoc GMing I agree. The min/max gaming I've seen in Calidor lately is atrocious and every legitimate person who works hard on their RP and making their characters legitimate and realistic people should be at least somewhat bothered by this as well. It isn't fair to the other classes for that to simply be the case if there aren't reprecussions for doing such a thing like being shit in situations that require intelligence or charisma which should be happening more often in game such as in he example that Ahmad brought up with this thread. Furthermore, I would say that such situations solved without violence should allow for at least equal xp being earned if not more from handling the situation in a more crafty manner.
|
|
|
Post by hunterkiller725 on Sept 4, 2013 19:53:53 GMT
so basicly what your saying is i Should get more exp for rolling a single skill check that is really easy to break...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2013 20:04:11 GMT
so basicly what your saying is i Should get more exp for rolling a single skill check that is really easy to break... No, I think basically what people are saying is that people who make charisma characters should have the option to attempt that skill check against humanoids that they share a language with. Like, you know, what's in the rules of the game, so that there are a variety of character types that are viable instead of just the most powerful damage build you can think of. Not letting bards make dip checks against thinking enemies is like not letting fighters have combat maneuvers or not letting casters use any kind of area control spells. You're drastically limiting a component of what makes the character viable and limiting the options for playability.
|
|