Revisiting the use of Diplo, Bluff and Intim.

[casdegere]

First before you read further, please take a look at PHB I, pg67, 71 and 76.

Next, out of the three, Intimidation is far more powerful then Diplomacy because it only requires verbal threats and body language. The target gets 1d20+his level or HD+wis mod + targets fear mod if any, to resist it. In combat Intimidation can be attempted as a standard action.

Bluff requires a sense motive check to see through so its pretty nice as well.

Bluff: Can be used in combat but only if one is trying to feint. After reading, if your not DIRECTLY interacting with the target it does not work. If the bluff works, it may work for 1 round, not for the duration of an interaction. It is not designed to be used to make someone believe that your a Prince and that they will always believe that. It is designed to be used to fool someone long enough to get past them or redirect their attention for a VERY short amount of time. That is what the Disguise skill does, pg 72.

Diplomacy: The most difficult to use as it normally takes at least, 1 minute. A rushed Diplomacy try can be attempted as a rull round action but again the character HAS to be DIRECTLY interacting and it will only perhaps get them to stop for a moment, not change their overall attitude. For instance, moving into harms way in the faces of the combatants to break up a fight. Which will only last for a moment, it does not change the combatants attitudes. Influencing an attitude is a one minute or longer activity that the target is willing or forced to observe.

I am bringing this up now because its use is kind of getting a little bit extreme in their application.

[Andre]

" I am bringing this up now because it's use is kind of getting a little bit extreme in their application"

Casdegere you did warn us you were blunt before this is true... but there's a difference between being " blunt " and being " overly controlling" and .. to be blunt.. you are straying dangerously close to the "overly controlling" end of the spectrum. Madelaine has had issue with you on this topic before as have I . When you're DM'ing your campaign you'll be the boss and we will happily go along with your rulings. However there's a fine line between constructive criticism and telling the DM how to run their campaign. You're veering more towards the " telling the DM how to run their campaign" bit .. and the interesting thing is, you are doing this after telling me via PM and in at least one thread on this forum that you were going to " quiet down" regarding the being a stickler on the rules thing.

As the DM I will decide (in the dragonlance game at least) if the use of diplomacy and bluff is " getting a little bit extreme in their application". Likewise Madelaine will decide if that's the case in her campaign. Look RPG's are a complicated thing frequently requiring " on the fly " decisions" .. inevitably casdegere the DM is going to make a judgment call you don't particularly favor but if the campaign as a whole is going to work you're just going to have to accept it.. campaigns in general will never, ever be as perfect as you seem to want them to be. I appreciate your enthuasism but quite frankly you're going overboard here.

Rin's diplomacy and bluff skills are at their current levels due to the fact he's earned a lot of RP points prior to Azcot joining the campaign... he's basically taken every feat that can be used to bump up diplomacy and/or bluff and bumped up his charisma to high levels.. again with well earned RP points.

This is getting old casdegere.. I'd prefer not to waste endless amounts of time debating the rules with you and concentrate on the "fun" elements of RPG'ing.. perhaps you have the time to debate and re-debate every detail in the campaign.. I do not and that's something you need to keep in mind too.... if you have that much spare time please gear it towards something more constructive like RP'ing in the forum threads (which you're great at once you set your mind to it as opposed to continously nit-picking with the DM's)... you're a great player Casdegere.. and you'll be an even better one once we can get past these "control freak" issues that you have.

I trust I've made myself clear?

[Andre]

To put this another way I'll give an example:

There was a campaign I was in where another player ran a monk PC and I was a fellow player... the player of the monk insisted that grapple checks are merely opposed strength checks and you don't figure in your attack bonus as well .... this seriously works to the disadvantage of characters such as the one I was running (Briana, a paladin .. paladins, like fighters, tend to have high attack roll bonuses).... after raising the question ONCE during an FG game session I then put something up on it in the forum... but my statement went something like this :

" I was a bit confused guys ... the player's handbook version 3.5 page page 156 under " grapple checks" in big blue words mentions the base attack bonus is part of the opposed grapple check rolls... not sure if it's really just opposed strength alone? It's the DM's call of course, if the DM would prefer just opposed strength checks that's fine too but I was just wondering... "

I then sent a PM to the DM alerting the DM of my post/thread that I'd started ... note how it's worded? The DM is given room to decide what they want to do .. either the DM will look the rules over and decide " oh that's right you DO include base attack bonus we'll do that from now on " and post accordingly on the forum or the DM will decide to stick with opposed strength rolls anyways... and I , as a player, would have been okay with either result ! Would it have sucked if I didn't get to factor in my base attack bonus ? Sure, it definitely would have worked to my disadvantage.. but I'm certainly not going to make a federal case out of it either... the DM is busy enough and quite frankly I have better things to do with my spare time than to endlessly nit-pick over rules on the forum... and you'll notice not once in that post did I make a comment to the effect of " I feel this rule makes so and so overpowered " which is what casdegere is REALLY trying to say with regard to Rin ... again that's the DM's call not a player's.

NOW do I make myself clear?

[casdegere]

Ok, I will not post my opinion on anything anymore. You are taking my opinion on a subject and suggesting that I somehow have control to manipulate you or anyone just because I have an opinion. I pointed out the rules and how I thought that the way the skills are being used is overbearing according to the rules, if you choose to ignore them fine. You seem to take everything personally and then in the same breath tell everyone else to act adult. C'mon.

I am not being controlling, I have no control over what you or others do and I am getting tired of you castigating me like this for having an opinion. You don't like it, kick me out but my concern is valid, especially after how everyone beat up on Madelaine over how she wanted her spell to work which was not exactly as the rules were. You have taken one sentence from what I wrote and used to to defend yourself against your decision for ignoring the proper, FAIR application of those skills.

[flak]

From my perspective, I kind of have to side with Caz here. Not because he is 'right' or anything like that, but because he is simply critiquing the gameplay. He only wants the game to be better, not twist it into what he feels it should be.

And truth be told, the way it is currently handled seems disjunctive. However, it isn't game-breaking or such, just a little off. Then again, it may only seem that way to me and not to anyone else.

So chill, eh? Rin can't save himself every fight by talking. If he does, the DM can fix that.

[Andre]

Feb 4, 2011 11:54:25 GMT -5 @casdegere said:

You don't like it, kick me out

Fair enough (and sorry far as I'm concerned you ARE being overly controlling).. You're out of the dragonlance campaign. I have better things to do with my time than to argue with you on a constant basis over how the campaign is run - it's obviously not up to your standards so , so be it.


Having said that , on a different note ... more than one person seems to be wondering why Rin's diplomacy and bluff skills are so high. (and btw folks there WILL be situations where he can't talk his way out of every fight ... he used it to good measure dealing with the arrogant elven prince Porthios - the "challenge" there if you will was getting past the SOB so you could talk with the elves which led to the next part of the campaign.. but it's not going to save him from a head-on battle with draconians and honestly, when was the last time any of you saw Rin start using diplomacy mid battle to get the draconians to say " You're right we shouldn't be fighting, let's all go have a beer " . I'll break it down for any concerned parties:

- 9 ranks max in diplomacy skill for a sixth level character
- +2 synergy bonus for 5 or more ranks in bluff (see the description for it in the PHB)
- +2 synergy bonus for 5 or more ranks in knowledge nobility (again see PHB)
- +6 bonus for charisma score of 22
- +3 for 16 Appearance score which stacks with charisma bonuses for diplomacy
- +3 for skill focus feat (see PHB)

That brings it up to 26 bonus total , I'm sure Rin will list the feats here that bring it up to plus 30 total if nothing else to satisfy players who have nothing better to do with their time

[Andre]

And looks like casdegere beat me to the punch and decided to leave the campaign anyways - copy of PM sent to me :

I think I will sit this one out, there are to many things with your GM style that bother me and it is interfering with my fun factor. Please take away my admin rights, there is enough info up about my Campaign if it ever needs to be played. If someone odd happens to the site I don't want to get blamed for it.

[darkalloy]

Actually the bonus's are a bit bigger now... I keep forgetting to update my stat page on here.... Bad Me!

Anyway
9 Ranks
+8 Cha bonus (26 Cha with cloak now))
+2 Synergy for Bluff
+2 Synergy for Knowledge nobility
+2 synergy for Sense Motive
+3 for Skill focus
+2 for Negotiator
+4 for appearance score of 18.... Pro ate the pm I sent about updating that as it isn't in my out box.
For a 32 total, my sheet says 33 but I think I just figured out how that happened, remember that FG added the ability for the mouse a mouse wheel roll to change modifiers. I just subtracted about ten as I bumped my wheel anyway, fixed to the proper 32.

[casdegere]

I wasn't questioning his ability but it's application. And I do not appreciate the inflection.

One more thing, normally people do not post PM's that they are sent thus their name, Private Message.

I would have sent this as a PM but I know where it would end up posted someplace anyway.

[flak]

I was hoping we were bigger than this.

Sorry fellas, I'm dropping everything; last thing I need is drama. By 'everything' I mean the DL campaign, Madelaine's, anything on these boards.

You have my email if you need me. If you don't, find me on the FG forums.

[Andre]

Flak will be missed... I'm already making arrangements to fill casdegere's slot, will start making similar arrangements for Flak's slot.

[Andre]

Just had an epiphany

So I was groaning to myself thinking " Okay great casdegere's gone, now Flak has left in a huff... it is going to take SO much time for me to write up new subplots for the brand new characters..."

Then it suddenly occurred to me... why am I killing myself when I have to deal with ungrateful players?

Don't get the wrong impression folks ... solardawn has been awesome, dark alloy has been epic... Madelaine and I had our disagreements but in the end I have to admire her - despite harsh words to her on my part she climbed right back up on her horse and went on both DM'ing AND playing in my campaign ... THAT is exactly the kind of maturity I look for from a player .. and quite frankly Madelaine's awesome too .... nydhog and I have had our disagreements in the past over the sort of morality expected from good aligned characters but he didn't leave the campaign in a huff over it either... he was big enough to move past it and stay in the group regardless.

And then... there are the players who aren't that mature... players who get huffy when the campaign doesn't go their way (yes I'm looking at you casdegere) or who take the brutal but simplistic solution " Well I disagree with you so I'm going to just leave the campaign entirely and to hell with the subplots you slaved over for my PC " (and yes I'm looking at you Flak - up until now I thought you were a stand up guy ... no wonder you and casdegere get along so well, in your own way you're just as arrogant as he is).

I looked over my threads and realized just how impatient I've been with players who insist on these sorts of kindergarten antics.. then I realized WHY I was being so impatient and short with them on the threads... If I had the loads of spare time casdegere seems to have with his endless commentary on how and why the campaigns should be run then I could sit there and babysit pouty players , hold their hands and reassure them that no little one, things aren't going to go your way this time and here's why....

But I DON'T have that sort of spare time... I have two small children who need me and a wife who needs my attention as well.. years later when my munckins are sixteen like casdegere's is I'll have more patience for the kindergarten antics, my kids will be embarrassed by dear old dad's presence instead of needing me the way they do right now ... but right now I don't... and given that any online group will , inevitably, attract immature people whom I WILL have to deal with rather than getting so impatient with them... I now realize I'm not at the point in my life where I have that sort of time to devote ... and quite honestly the thing about running a campaign THIS heavy on the RP, with this many subplots tailored specifically to the players plus the forum activity.. it's a labor of love for me and I really enjoyed it, I truly did.. but truth be told I was starting to get a bit burnt out too ... it's the kind of thing I can see myself doing YEARS later when the kids are older ... but not now...

Darkalloy (Rin), Solardawn (Serinda), Madelaine (Za'era) and nydhog (Eolaer).. it has truly been a joy playing with you (Valaun and Aldhurin didn't get a chance to know you nearly as well but i will say it was fun being with you in the Drow campaign ) ... it was a TON of fun being your DM , seriously it was really a blast.. players like you are the reason I DM in the first place.... and I cannot apologize enough for leaving you high and dry like this but... in a way I owe casdegere and flak for finally waking me up to something I should have realized a long time ago.

Casdegere I'm about to make you a very happy man... you are not going to be one hundred percent happy unless everything goes your way so ... you've got it.. as everyone reading this can probably guess by now I'm stepping down from the dragonlance campaign leaving casdegere free to run his own campaign that will no doubt meet up to his exacting standards... I find myself uncertain how well he'll do as a player.. I think some people simply are incapable of being players as opposed to being the DM and casdegere is one of them.. but who knows maybe he'll surprise me and actually start cooperating with Madelaline.

Flak with me gone your "drama" as you put it goes bye bye, I see no reason for you not to rejoin the group. Have fun on that pedestal you've elevated yourself upon - just be careful not to fall off.

This is the final time I'll be logging into this forum ... darkalloy, solardawn, madelaline and nydhog feel free to e-mail me from time to time if you have a spare moment , let me know how you're doing ([e-mail]) ... casdegere and flak get a big old " block" on my e-mail filter... I've had enough of casdegere on the forums and certainly don't want to deal with him anymore after this and flak has irritated me to the point where I don't want anything to do with him either... to the rest of you ... all the best and take care !

[Andre]

Also darkalloy and madelaine (the two other admin's on here).. normally I'd bring myself back down from "admin" to just "normal" member or delete my account entirely.. but what frightens me is this... I was the one who originally created this board on proforums under my e-mail address.. basically I'm really worried about messing up the forum to the point where people can no longer log into it if I make any changes to my account... if there is a way to do it Madelaine or Darkalloy feel free to e-mail me directly and let me know (since I won't be checking this forum anymore) ...

[darkalloy]

I will endeavor to find away to get the true admin status as I do have the time to do all the admin stuff but even if I can't all the admin stuff can still be done as a normal admin, so I suppose I shall be making the game when posts and such.

[madelaine]

*sighs*

I really really really will miss Za'era and maybe I will write a story or two one day about/with her. There has been very much depth and heart in this character.

I hope you change your mind and continue Andre but I understand if you cancel it.