You have been taken by the Mists

Author Topic: opposed skill checks  (Read 7357 times)

peluscious

  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
  • The incredible off-topic man!
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #25 on: August 11, 2010, 01:25:17 PM »
I try to use good judgement.
Someone once tried to make my very lawful character to participate in adultery. My first reaction was "No way, no!". She rolled a big influence, but that didn't make me instantly agree to it. Just convinced me to talk about it.
With me, the few bad placed social rolls were the kind that ended interaction (like antagonizing me to go away, or influencing me to just let something stay as it is). I could argue, but i think its more civilized, smart and quick to just accept the silly roll as a way to quit an interaction that probably wouldn't be fun anyway.

Vespertilio

  • Never met a Dark Lord, not a
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1636
  • We can't stop here, this is bat country!
    • Messages from Nihil
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #26 on: August 11, 2010, 02:50:52 PM »
I try to use good judgement.
Someone once tried to make my very lawful character to participate in adultery. My first reaction was "No way, no!". She rolled a big influence, but that didn't make me instantly agree to it. Just convinced me to talk about it.
With me, the few bad placed social rolls were the kind that ended interaction (like antagonizing me to go away, or influencing me to just let something stay as it is). I could argue, but i think its more civilized, smart and quick to just accept the silly roll as a way to quit an interaction that probably wouldn't be fun anyway.

I agree with this as an excellent way to handle those sort of situations.

In cases where the roll isn't even appropriate for pcs, such as appraise which has been stated by the staff as a skill which only affects npcs, it is not really discourteous in my opinion to ignore a roll that shouldn't have been made in the first place.



I could just run into the room and punch you in the balls; sure, that's scary. That's entertainment. But it isn't horror...

Zedrik

  • Warbird
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
  • The Hellrabbits are watching you.
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #27 on: August 11, 2010, 06:13:22 PM »
I am open to taking a roll into consideration with my response. But...
95% of rolls I come across are like:
Xxxxxx glares. Antagonize: 45

Uh, no. Really. It doesn't work that way.

Warning: Don't provoke the high-level Falkovnian wizard. He bites. (And not in the good way.)

Rex

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3948
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #28 on: August 11, 2010, 06:41:06 PM »
Yeesh....and to think I've posted that silly interaction chart....oh.....8000 times?  d20 SRD folks.  Hypertext even pretty east to google fu it.

~Rex
Sometimes brutal violence is the only answer.

Gorasin

  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #29 on: August 11, 2010, 08:22:33 PM »
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html

For all your srd needs.

Intimidate (CHA)
Check: The character can change others' behavior with a successful check. The DC is typically 10 + the target's Hit Dice. Any bonuses that a target may have on saving throws against fear increase the DC.
Retry: Generally, retries do not work. Even if the initial check succeeds, the other character can only be intimidated so far, and a retry doesn't help. If the initial check fails, the other character has probably become more firmly resolved to resist the intimidator, and a retry is futile.
Special: If the character has 5 or more ranks in Bluff , the character gets a +2 synergy bonus on Intimidate checks.

Bluff (CHA)
Check: A Bluff check is opposed by the target's Sense Motive check. Favorable and unfavorable circumstances weigh heavily on the outcome of a bluff. Two circumstances can weigh against the character: The bluff is hard to believe, or the action that the target is to take goes against the target's self-interest, nature, personality, orders, etc. If it's important, the DM can distinguish between a bluff that fails because the target doesn't believe it and one that fails because it just asks too much of the target. For instance, if the target gets a +10 bonus because the bluff demands something risky of the target, and the Sense Motive check succeeds by 10 or less, then the target didn't so much see through the bluff as prove reluctant to go along with it. If the target succeeds by 11 or more, he has seen through the bluff (and would have done so even if it had not entailed any demand on him).
A successful Bluff check indicates that the target reacts as the character wishes, at least for a short time (usually 1 round or less) or believes something that the character wants him to believe.
A bluff requires interaction between the character and the target. Creatures unaware of the character cannot be bluffed. A bluff always takes at least 1 round (and is at least a full-round action) but can take much longer if the character tries something elaborate.
Feinting in Combat: The character can also use Bluff to mislead an opponent in combat so that he can't dodge the character's attack effectively. Doing so is a miscellaneous standard action that does not draw an attack of opportunity. If the character is successful, the next attack the character makes against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn. Feinting in this way against a nonhumanoid is difficult because it's harder to read a strange creature's body language; the character suffers a –4 penalty. Against a creature of animal Intelligence (1 or 2) it's even harder; the character suffers a –8 penalty. Against a nonintelligent creature, it's impossible.
Creating a Diversion to Hide: The character can use Bluff to help the character hide. A successful Bluff check can give the character the momentary diversion the character needs to attempt a Hide check while people are aware of the character.
Retry: Generally, a failed Bluff check makes the target too suspicious for a bluffer to try another one in the same circumstances. For feinting in combat, the character may retry freely.
Special: Having 5 or more ranks in Bluff gives the character a +2 synergy bonus on Intimidate and Pick Pocket checks and a +2 synergy bonus on an Innuendo check to transmit a message. Also, if the character has 5 or more ranks of Bluff, the character gets a +2 synergy bonus on Disguise checks when the character knows that the character is being observed and the character tries to act in character.
The dark side is always there, waiting for us to enter, waiting to enter us.
Until next time, try to enjoy the daylight.

Thoraion

  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 398
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #30 on: August 13, 2010, 06:23:38 AM »
That adds even more to the confusion, i fear.
Intimidate, Taunt and Persuasion are all covered in the NWN manual. Yes, that's different from the SRD, but since Sense motive (for example) is completely out of scope in NWN, i am glad to accept what system is there.

So what about the effects?
First, none of the skills are intended to establish mind control or to cause something the receiver would NEVER do. Please note the word "never".

What should be always possible are the following examples:
Intimidate: Threaten and shouting at someone and then making the antagonize roll to make him cease something (including to constantly insult someone or just being a jerk who needs to fear no consequences). A glance may not suffice, but please note that a line of text accompanied with a high antagonize roll might well indicate that there's authority in the voice and the general feeling that it may not be such a good idea to taunt him further.

Taunt: Insulting someone for some time and then making a antagonize roll to cause someone to lose his good behaviour or to speak a threat - or to cause that one to just go berserk and attack, whatever is more appropriate. But it should have at least some effect.

Persuade: Here is again an example for something the text messages can't transport well enough. A comforting voice and other aspects of body language that support trust and comfort. So that's what can be expected. Calming down someone, stop someone from provoking without intimidating him. Persuading someone that something might not be that bad an idea. The latter, however, is very dependant from the receiving character. A rogue might be easier to persuade to participate in a burglar than a paladin (who might even react as if he just was affected by a taunt). The contrary may be true for suggesting to donate half the loot to the temple.
But you should not really expect everybody to comply when you suggest to participate in a lone walk in the crypts or the forest at night. A perfect hook for an influence roll, however, is a hint that someone hesitates and when the player indicates that some sucessfull persuasion might change his attitude.

You should accept that all social skills have an effect that causes you to do something at least different than you had in mind. Mind, different - not necessarily something you would not do at all. And you usually won't die if your paladin goes ballistic. He'll just need to speak an extra prayer later that night and castigate himself a bit  :twisted:
Currently playing:
no characters, will eventually be back

Characters in stock:
- Darian Eisenhand        - Ansgar "Frettchen" Ostvent
- Thorben Eibenfinder    - Einar Falkensang

Minstrel

  • Official Mascot of the
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2040
  • Cat in the Hat
Re: opposed skill checks
« Reply #31 on: August 13, 2010, 09:47:20 AM »
When it comes to social, we should have....

Diplomacy, Bluff, Taunt, Intimidate, Sense Motive, Disguise

We've got..

Influence, Antagonize.

It's going to be a mess-up no matter which way you go.


As for combat, if you want to RP it, use the games mechanics. It's brutish, but preferable to standing there rolling Touch Attack, Dodge, Tumble, Strength, and hells-knows-what.