Anatomy of Failed Design: 3e Diplomacy.

[Kaelik]

What is Diplomacy?

3e diplomacy is terrible, but what the fuck is it? It's not lying, that's bluff. It's not threatening, that's intimidate. And it's not mind control because... Who the fuck are we kidding, 3e diplomacy is goddam mind control and we all hate it.

So what should it be? Here are some things that might need to be covered by the skill, and aren't stupid:

1) Convincing someone of some true fact. Laying out an argument.
2) Negotiation between equals. Compromise.
3) Political Maneuvering to impress audience/voters/the king/the system, someone besides the person you are actually competing with who has authority over both of you.

What we don't need is another fucking way to make friends and influence people.

Why it fails

Because it's a shitty mind control mechanic, haven't you been reading?

No really:

1) Too specific of an effect. It makes the target "Helpful" with the definition actions of "Protect, back up, heal, aid." So here you are, talking to a Dragon that wants to murder you, and after you finish, he wants to cast Heal on you and defend you from the assassins you were running from. Say fucking what?

2) Too general on it's effects. For a fucking mind control, it's just begging to start mother may I arguments with the DM. Compare that to Dominate Person, that has very few arguments left. And what's the duration anyway?

3) Synergy ranks, Synergy features, Skills suck. So, a level 2 Half Elf Binder/Marshal can have a diplomacy check of +24 and not take a -10 penalty for taking a single round instead of a minute. It's a skill, it's going to be jacked up, the effects it has when you have two RNGs more than you are supposed to at you level should be something that doesn't break the game.

4) Synergy with itself/spells. If you charm something, it becomes Friendly, reducing the check to make it Helpful to a mere DC 20. And what exactly stops you from stacking Diplomacy on itself? Nothing really. Well fuck.

5) Wait WTF, you mean the DC doesn't scale at all? So... Steve the Crap covered Farmer is fucking identical to an Ancient Gold Dragon in how hard it is to get them to help you dig a ditch?

6) Have I mentioned that it's fucking Mindcontrol? It doesn't address any of the things that are actually needed from diplomacy, instead just being Charm for Rogues. Fuck that.

How do we make this not suck?

Well let's start with what we need:

1) Negotiations between equals. Diplomacy needs to have a function for compromise. This should not fucking work at all when the level 1 Bard meets a Gold Dragon, this should not even be an option.

Compromise only works when you are dealing with something within 2 of your CR, and you take a penalty or bonus of +-2 per CR difference depending on if you are higher or lower. And yes, this prevents you from compromising even if you are the Gold Dragon, because that's called dictating terms, and it's an intimidate check.

You can represent a group, and for that representing, you CR is considered to be the EL of the group for compromise actions.

You and your opponent both state what you want, and then you make opposed checks, and the winner gets a slightly better deal. Yes you still have to MTP that deal, what am I, your mother.

2) You want to make a speech, so you get elected bossman of the goblin tribe. Great, roll opposed checks with whomever you are competing, and the winner gets favor. More favor for a higher win ratio, whether that's a greater majority of the goblin tribe, or the king giving you the whole duchy, instead of just a slightly better half of it. This only works when the judging party doesn't have any serious reason to prefer one over the other. As per RL, giving concessions to the judging party makes them like you.

3) Argument part: wait for it. I'm playing SCII.

[Blasted]

I'm not sure about it only applying between equals. For instance, the low level bard I would expect to use diplomacy with the dragon, if only to stop the dragon from burnifying a village. Similarly Heiro negotiated successfully with the Romans, even though the city of Syracuse was not anything near as powerful as Rome.
I think it's a matter of what can be achieved through diplomacy, rather than who can use it.
Again, that dragon may choose to use diplomacy rather than intimidate, because it's much easier to get people to agree to niceties, even if it's understood by both parties to be a fait accompli.
You could have a scale of what can be accomplished based on the opposed CR.

I see no way of getting out of 'Mother may I?' simply because there are too many variables in what the players may want to achieve.

[Kaelik]

I'm not sure about it only applying between equals. For instance, the low level bard I would expect to use diplomacy with the dragon, if only to stop the dragon from burnifying a village. Similarly Heiro negotiated successfully with the Romans, even though the city of Syracuse was not anything near as powerful as Rome.
I think it's a matter of what can be achieved through diplomacy, rather than who can use it.
Again, that dragon may choose to use diplomacy rather than intimidate, because it's much easier to get people to agree to niceties, even if it's understood by both parties to be a fait accompli.
You could have a scale of what can be accomplished based on the opposed CR.

I see no way of getting out of 'Mother may I?' simply because there are too many variables in what the players may want to achieve.

Read again. Three facets of diplomacy, one of them only works, the one called "Compromise." If you want to lay out the argument that eating the Bard is bad because in the long run, the Bard can pay him way more gold, that's section 3.

[Blasted]

No, I want to argue that the bard and dragon could reach a compromise and use the compromise framework. I think that this could be accommodated by a sliding scale for compromises based on CR. The bard will have to compromise a whole lot more than the dragon in order to get anything.

[Dominicius]

And what if we want characters that can basicly mind control others by being really awesome at public speaking?

[BearsAreBrown]

And what if we want characters that can basicly mind control others by being really awesome at public speaking?

Be a Wizard.

[Kaelik]

And what if we want characters that can basicly mind control others by being really awesome at public speaking?

Take a skill feat, or play a class with a class feature.

[Bihlbo]

(distracted rambling that shouldn't have been posted has been removed)

[Xenologer]

If diplomacy means, "I know what to say when attempting to be persuasive," the only useful thing I've done with it as a DM is to have them make a diplomacy roll so that I know how much information to give them about the NPC. It's still preferable that they actually act it out (if they feel they can), though obviously not all players are going to feel comfortable doing that.

An example of the sort of thing we did:

"My character is going to sit down and try to convince this kid to switch sides."

"Make a diplomacy check." They roll something sufficient to reach whatever arbitrarily high DC I have set. "Okay. Then it occurs to your character that given X thing you've seen and Y thing this kid has done that you might be able to appeal to his whatever-whatever by reminding him of blahblahblah."

Basically, if diplomacy is knowing the best thing to say, the only thing I've been able to do it was to tell them what their character knows. Now, how far "knowing the best thing to say" should get a character is debatable, and people who are good with people (particularly experienced persuaders/manipulators) tend to give a different answer than people who are not. To some people, the idea that anybody could do what I did for years (fundraising for non-profits, some of it door to door, hoo boy) is unfathomable and a sign that something is broken.

However, there is admittedly a difference between walking up to someone's door and taking them from, "I don't like animals," to "I'm going to write a check out to the ASPCA and hand it to this girl I've never met who knocked on my door at quarter to nine in a neighborhood that forbids soliciting," and taking a territorial dragon from eat-mode to BFF. Knowing "the best thing to say" may not actually translate to knowing an effective thing to say, because honestly there may not be one.

Doing diplomacy this way obviously means throwing away all the bad tables and going by arbitrary gut feelings as the DM, which is doable but definitely not something that's fun to do after paying good money for the book the tables are printed in.

[Zinegata]

I should probably dig up my post on Mouse Guard social combat, as it involves things like "compromises".

[PoliteNewb]

I should probably dig up my post on Mouse Guard social combat, as it involves things like "compromises".

You should; after you talked about it before, I went and got it, and the resolution system is actually pretty awesome.

[TarkisFlux]

Umm, the bullshit that is skill DCs and all of the mechanical problems with 3.5e's instantiation aside, is there a reason why diplomacy as a form of mind control is bad? Why don't we need another way to make friends and influence people that isn't magic?

[Zinegata]

Found the thread where I talked about Mouse Guard. It's been a while:

http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51901& ... sc&start=0

[Kaelik]

Umm, the bullshit that is skill DCs and all of the mechanical problems with 3.5e's instantiation aside, is there a reason why diplomacy as a form of mind control is bad? Why don't we need another way to make friends and influence people that isn't magic?

Because you people are all too small minded and stupid to be worth my time apparently.

Fine, you can have a seven thousandth Mind control method that is less clear and more stupid than the others. And you still won't have any rules for negotiating, convincing someone of something that is true, or performing a Xantos Gambit to get yourself elected King.

EDIT:

Tarkis is a Bitch
You use your whiny bitching to take control of your opponents mind.
Benefit: You may cast Dominate Person at will with your voice. Only there is no saving throw and it bypasses immunities.
Special: You can only take this feat if your name is TarkisFlux, and you are trying to ruin the game.

There you go, now you can go the fuck away and let people who aren't stupid talk about diplomacy.

[MGuy]

That seemed unnecessary. .

Anyway wasn't there a long discussion about social combat prior to this?I think some interesting points were made there about what diplomaticraft should look like. But I is too lazy to link it. Help please?

[Zinegata]

That seemed unnecessary. .

Anyway wasn't there a long discussion about social combat prior to this?I think some interesting points were made there about what diplomaticraft should look like. But I is too lazy to link it. Help please?

I just linked the latest round, actually. Although there are probably other threads that are even older.

[PhoneLobster]

I think if diplomacy powers are giving out individual (supposedly) measurable goals they should be restricted to ones that make sense within a broad combat encounter and occur using similar mechanics and resources.

My various improbable experiments with social combat mechanics tell me the best social combat happens IN regular combat.

Basically there should be social attack mechanics to convince the dark knight to honorably or pridefully throw his sword aside when yours breaks and to break the brigands morale and have them surrender, or make you the new boss when you take down that bastard Robin Hood.

[TarkisFlux]

<bunch of useless bullshit>

Fine, you can have a seven thousandth Mind control method that is less clear and more stupid than the others. And you still won't have any rules for negotiating, convincing someone of something that is true, or performing a Xantos Gambit to get yourself elected King.

<more useless and uninspired bullshit>

Fuck you Kaelik. Nice job missing my point and failing to actually answer my questions.

Let's try this again. I was asking why the idea of skill based mind control is bad on its face, because that's not clear from your post at all. It's clear that the current setup is fucked, and I'm not disputing that. It's also clear that you think charm for rogues is bullshit, but it's not clear why you think that's bullshit thematically since it's basically fast-talking someone into something and making them agree with you. Call it something else if it helps you wrap your bitter mind around the question: why is <some skill name> in a non-broke-as-fuck setup that functions similarly to the mind control available to some classes in the game prima face bad?

[ubernoob]

If you want magical mind control for rogues, they totally did print the beguiler class. It's not too bad at it.

[Zinegata]

<bunch of useless bullshit>

Fine, you can have a seven thousandth Mind control method that is less clear and more stupid than the others. And you still won't have any rules for negotiating, convincing someone of something that is true, or performing a Xantos Gambit to get yourself elected King.

<more useless and uninspired bullshit>

Fuck you Kaelik. Nice job missing my point and failing to actually answer my questions.

Let's try this again. I was asking why the idea of skill based mind control is bad on its face, because that's not clear from your post at all. It's clear that the current setup is fucked, and I'm not disputing that. It's also clear that you think charm for rogues is bullshit, but it's not clear why you think that's bullshit thematically since it's basically fast-talking someone into something and making them agree with you. Call it something else if it helps you wrap your bitter mind around the question: why is <some skill name> in a non-broke-as-fuck setup that functions similarly to the mind control available to some classes in the game prima face bad?

People are very rarely completely and utterly convinced by the other party in a diplomatic conference. More often than not, there's a give or take on both sides if they come to a resolution.

That's why in Mouse Guard, suffering even just 1 point of "damage" in social combat forces you to give some kind of compromise to the losing party. It's still possible to suffer 0 damage during social combat and totally convince the party of the justness of your cause, but it's very rare and difficult to pull off.

[PhoneLobster]

Nice job missing my point and failing to actually answer my questions.

Let me try answering your question...

If you want magical mind control for rogues, they totally did print the beguiler class. It's not too bad at it.

AKA "Fighters can't have nice things!"

See 'cause you're not a character wearing the "magic" pants you aren't allowed to do, well, anything you know useful.

[Kaelik]

Fuck you Kaelik. Nice job missing my point and failing to actually answer my questions.

Let's try this again. I was asking why the idea of skill based mind control is bad on its face, because that's not clear from your post at all. It's clear that the current setup is fucked, and I'm not disputing that. It's also clear that you think charm for rogues is bullshit, but it's not clear why you think that's bullshit thematically since it's basically fast-talking someone into something and making them agree with you. Call it something else if it helps you wrap your bitter mind around the question: why is <some skill name> in a non-broke-as-fuck setup that functions similarly to the mind control available to some classes in the game prima face bad?

Fuck you Tarkis, I didn't miss your point, and I addressed it, you just forgot the first half of my post when it got to the part where I started mocking your stupid ass.

The idea of skill based mind control isn't bad if you are in a game where attacks are skill based, like Shadowrun. It is if you are in D&D, where skills are not for fucking attacks.

I don't think Charm for Rogues is bullshit, I specifically suggested charm for rogues be a goddam feat or class feature, and not a fucking skill.

It doesn't matter what you call the skill, if you are playing D&D, skills are for resolving actions that are not attacks on your opposition.

Skills are Jumping, Riding, Knowing things, Seeing things, talking to people, and just generally performing actions that you might do in combat, but are not combat themselves.

Your question is exactly as dumb as asking why Iajitsu Focus is a dumbfuck skill that shouldn't exist, or why there isn't a skill called "Fire damage" that you roll on to do fire damage.

So I made a fucking mind control feat that doesn't require magic, so you can go away and let people who want to talk about making the skill diplomacy not suck can do that without you fucking whining.

[Username17]

I really don't see why there shouldn't be a skill that makes friends with people. Making friends with people is something people want to do sometimes, and it seems reasonable that a skill would do it. Seriously, the weird part to me is that there is a magic spell that makes friends. Because making friends is something that people do in the real world all the time with no magical power at all available to anyone.

-Username17

[Kaelik]

I really don't see why there shouldn't be a skill that makes friends with people. Making friends with people is something people want to do sometimes, and it seems reasonable that a skill would do it. Seriously, the weird part to me is that there is a magic spell that makes friends. Because making friends is something that people do in the real world all the time with no magical power at all available to anyone.

"Making friends with people" is something you can leave to MTP, because it doesn't make sense for that to be a skill. Everyone makes friends with people that are like them, the end. People do not have a graduated curve of being able to make friends.

Maybe if you want to make a skill that makes friends with people, you could do that as one part of Diplomacy, or as it's own stupid skill, but the skill shouldn't be mind control without the magic tag, which is what it is, and which everyone is bitching about how they need the rogue to brainwash people or it's not fair.

[tussock]

Too specific of an effect. It makes the target "Helpful" with the definition actions of "Protect, back up, heal, aid." So here you are, talking to a Dragon that wants to murder you, and after you finish, he wants to cast Heal on you and defend you from the assassins you were running from. Say fucking what?

It's *not* mind control.

What I've always said with it is that it's not even charm person. If you're raiding the dragon's nest and diplomacy his ass into being friendly, he's going to take all your gear and let you live if you promise an exorbitant tribute, and maybe he needs a guard or two. Maybe he even fancies trying for half-dragons with his new buddy. Yes, he will kill the assassins, because they're in his fucking lair.

Got a better deal? Put it on the table. Deals are what diplomacy lets you try for, when your foes aren't initially in the mood to make one.

Friendly? He's a dragon, you tried to steal his treasure, that is friendly, helpful, and beneficial compared to what he would do without diplomacy. Test his patience even slightly and he's not friendly any more, because dragons are like that.