will vs. diplomacy

[bitula]

Hi, where can I find what to counter roll for a roll. For example, what would one roll against a diplomacy roll? Someone told me will check, but will is also for bluf, and intimidate, and it is fishy anyway, it could be as well wisdom, or counter diplo with diplo. So what do you think about this?

[raetin]

This isn't official, but since your topic has gone un-approved for a bit I'll try. If a DM replies, their word outweighs mine.

I don't think PCs should roll diplomacy or bluff against each other. I've seen people counter bluff with listen (eh?). Will sorta makes sense, except that rolling a saving throw versus a skill is a weird, and essentially unfair, comparison.

The pen-and-paper descriptions are thus:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/bluff.htm (note that there is nothing meaningfully comparable to sense motive in nwn2)
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm

Note, however, that neither skill is meant to be used against a PC. You are in control of your PC, a good bluff or diplomacy roll doesn't mean you *must* believe something you feel your character would think is untrue, nor does it mean you *must* spare the life of someone your character would normally kill.

[bitula]

This isn't official, but since your topic has gone un-approved for a bit I'll try. If a DM replies, their word outweighs mine.

I don't think PCs should roll diplomacy or bluff against each other. I've seen people counter bluff with listen (eh?). Will sorta makes sense, except that rolling a saving throw versus a skill is a weird, and essentially unfair, comparison.

The pen-and-paper descriptions are thus:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/bluff.htm (note that there is nothing meaningfully comparable to sense motive in nwn2)
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm

Note, however, that neither skill is meant to be used against a PC. You are in control of your PC, a good bluff or diplomacy roll doesn't mean you *must* believe something you feel your character would think is untrue, nor does it mean you *must* spare the life of someone your character would normally kill.

Well I happen to put all my skill points into diplomacy during leveling and the only diplomacy roll able NPC I met is that of the troll quest (ofcourse I easily passed it). So then why would one invest into diplomacy if it is not meant to be used vs. PC?

[raetin]

I made the same mistake, only with bluff, on a different PW. Which was doubly bad, most people would not only ignore the bluff, but also metagame the lie.

Bluff does have its use for the feint feat, however.

On the diplomacy side of things, the only reliable use is going to be NPC interaction and DM events. If it is just you and some other players, the other players will have to agree to your use, and ideally, set a DC (counter rolls vs diplomacy don't really make sense). But that is usually difficult at best.

[bitula]

I made the same mistake, only with bluff, on a different PW. Which was doubly bad, most people would not only ignore the bluff, but also metagame the lie.

Bluff does have its use for the feint feat, however.

On the diplomacy side of things, the only reliable use is going to be NPC interaction and DM events. If it is just you and some other players, the other players will have to agree to your use, and ideally, set a DC (counter rolls vs diplomacy don't really make sense). But that is usually difficult at best.

I think both diplo counter role and initial attitude is valid. If someone has a high diplomacy, he may opt to counter roll, however in this case one needs to counter my reasoning via his own reasoning, thus he has to say something. However when I for example tried to avoid PVP and was reasoning in a diplomatic manner and then rolled to support my claim, people countered it with a will save - which is nonsense per se - or they counter rolled with diplomacy without a counter statement! Now that is funny. So one either engage in a diplomatic argument with as many counter rolls as fits or just shouldn't roll anything and I add up my roll to his initial state score (explained in the D&D link). However in the latter case, which should be the common case, one needs to ooc-ly state his initial status towards me before I roll, like "\\IS:unfriendly". So this would be my recommendation on how to use diplomacy vs. pc. Maybe this rule shouldn't be enforced, but could be a DM recommended guideline. To avoid lengthy discussions in game about how to interprete diplomacy rolls it would be nice to have a BG Staff supported guideline. It would be quite sad to leave this important ability useless, it's not like what to do with the bane spell, it is a much severe issue I believe. Or another solution is to put in much more NPC-s so that one would benefit from it at least this way. Or I imagine some NPC-s could be contacted each in game day with the possibility of a new roll, and there would be some reward for it...

[Duster47]

Suggest you read this thread about Skill Checks.

[raetin]

That topic is a pretty good resource.

However, I am completely positive that you cannot forcefully affect someone with a diplomacy or bluff roll. It is a suggestion. They can follow it, or they can ignore it. I don't roll, and I suggest you don't, because the responses are usually ridiculous.

Same goes for intimidation. You can roll it, good RP'ers will take it as a suggestion, but you don't get to control the other person because you won a roll. An intimidated person is just as likely to attack, as they are to run, or cower. Some characters are also immune to fear, and by extension, intimidation, via spell or class benefits.

This is something that isn't going to change.

[bitula]

However, I am completely positive that you cannot forcefully affect someone with a diplomacy or bluff roll.

Why not? IMO being IC doesn't and shouldn't mean that your personal OOC thoughts should control your character. Let the environment and game mechanics decide what happens with a character. Sitting before a computer and deciding for yourself what your character thinks and how he reacts is not what D&D style Role Playing is about. You do not now his thoughts, he is not you, you just make up his background and build a story etc. Of course evidently weak statements can be disbelieved without a roll, but any sound statement could be rolled. Well at least this is what I think about this issue.

[raetin]

I'm being too nice.

1. The d20srd states that diplomacy is for use against NPCs.
2. Letting you control other people's PCs via a diplomacy roll makes no sense. You get to walk up to your mortal PC enemy, manage to roll a 50, and then that PC has no choice but to be friends with you? Sorry, doesn't work that way.
3. Pretty much every DM comment I've seen on this subject states exactly what I'm telling you.
4. Locked. Let it go.