RandomCasualty wrote:Eventually when you get down to it, you want certain NPCs who are inviolate to diplomacy. The king shouldn't ever get swindled out of his kingdom or the BBEG talked into converting to good, unless it's part of the plot.
I have a problem with this, and I'm curious to see who falls where on this issue.
I don't run games wherein I have a predetermined notion of where the plot is 'supposed to go'. I run games wherein I set up characters with motivations and goals, and the PCs interact with them, sometimes helping, oftentimes upsetting them. But I have never, and believe I will never, prevented the PCs from being able to use their abilities upon an NPC without a valid mechanical reason for it.
If a PC can nail a DC 40 Bluff check at 5th level (and I've seen it happen), they can walk out of a guarded stronghold and tell the guards "Hey, don't bother with us, we're just illusions." I don't see why a similar miracle wouldn't allow the PCs to swindle a king out of his kingdom.
I view RC's commentary above as a subtle kind of railroading -- basically, if you as the DM are unprepared to deal with the effects of a PC's abilities, you need to disallow the ability explicity before creation, or you are going to end up depriving him of his stated shtick at some random time that will inevitably be a moment that the player thinks is important and, more importantly, cool.
Just wanted to get y'alls opinions.