Jump to content

[Wisdom]Using this dialogue option is a better choice.


Recommended Posts

If your character's intelligence, knowledge in medicine, or some other skill or ability is important to the conversation I personally would something telling me that I my character knows what's up.

 

Likewise, if P:E has some sort of morality or karma system, the differences between "[Lie] I'm going to kill you if you don't give me the information" and "[Truth] I'm going to kill you if you don't give me the information" can mean quite a bit of difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread: :deadhorse:

Yes, I haven't seen much in the ways of new arguments for a few pages now.

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To my mind either you have distinct [bluff] and [intimidate] mechanics (ie situations that are distinct in how/when you use them), so that they are unambiguous in use, or you've got a very good argument that you don't need two separate skills.

 

I'll concede that you'd have an argument, but not a very good one. They can't be combined for this reason...Being good at making people afraid doesn't necessarily make you good at all of the other things that bluff entails. Why have LESS options?

 

I agree that intimidate isn't as useful as bluff because it has far more narrow usage, and could generally be replaced completely by someone who is good at bluffing. That doesn't mean it has no place in an RPG, where character concept and vision rule the day. NOT which power is leetest.

 

As a roleplayer, I may envision my character being a gruff, anti-social dude who is good at frightening people, but otherwise has very few social graces. For this character, it would make no sense for me to take the bluff(or "speech") skill, but taking the intimidation skill would fit nicely. There is not really any reason to eliminate it as a skill, even if the number crunchers among us consider it inferior to bluff if used in this way. Those who have no interest in the roleplaying value of the skill, and who would rather just use the best skill available can do so, and those who craft their characters based on a real character concept can do so without having their options limited by the number crunchers. Everyone wins.

 

Yes this exactly

 

The point of having two skills is they fit different characters and different character styles which then give more color and substance to the way speech & dialoge really play out for two different characters vs just having a generic speech skill that worked the same for everyone - the point of having more choices is to make each individual chararcer more unique and interesting vs making them all cookie cutter clones of each other with no real discernable differences.

Nomadic Wayfarer of the Obsidian Order


 

Not all those that wander are lost...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why have LESS options?

 

Because contrary to what people think, more isn't always better. Give people too many options and things can clearly become obfuscated. I hope I don't need to detail why an extreme example such as 37 different speech related skills would obfuscate many of the purposes of said skills, all the while also making the game more cumbersome to build.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why have LESS options?

 

Because contrary to what people think, more isn't always better. Give people too many options and things can clearly become obfuscated. I hope I don't need to detail why an extreme example such as 37 different speech related skills would obfuscate many of the purposes of said skills, all the while also making the game more cumbersome to build.

 

Some of the best guitar riffs in the world are simplistic, "Smoke on the Water". To chime in with alanschu, sometimes less is more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why have LESS options?

 

Because contrary to what people think, more isn't always better. Give people too many options and things can clearly become obfuscated. I hope I don't need to detail why an extreme example such as 37 different speech related skills would obfuscate many of the purposes of said skills, all the while also making the game more cumbersome to build.

 

Absolutely correct let me say I am pretty sure I am not in favor of 37 different speech related skills for PE!

 

However I would like to see a dozen or two ways that things can be used, drawn upon, inserted into, or otherwise merged into the conversation process including things such as:

 

general speech skills like diplomacy, bluff, intimidate;

options to choose between truth and lie,

options to use skills like sleight of hand, pickpocket, stealing, bribes, or sex;

options to use your freindship or rivalry with factions or individuals,

options to use special related knowledge you have discovered,

options to call upon companions to voice an opinion or otherwise enter the conversation,

options related to characters or companions classes

(bards could sing - ciphers could cipher - warriors could fart or belch perhaps simultaneously if they have been trained to do so)

and any other useful things the devs can come up with without my assistance - but no more than 36 - unless they are really good... :disguise:

Nomadic Wayfarer of the Obsidian Order


 

Not all those that wander are lost...

Link to post
Share on other sites

My big problem, ultimately, with this line of debate is that you're saying it is okay for the scrawniest, most non-magical person in the world to intimidate a person or group just because they have a high enough charisma and bluff skill.

 

This is true, to an extent. If I'm a scrawny, non-combat-looking guy, but I bluff you into believing that I'm wearing an explosive device and am just crazy enough to blow myself up along with you, I'm sure that can be intimidating. And that is all based off using the bluff skill and my charisma. The same could be said of using the intimidate skill. You don't have to look tough to say, "Hey, I DO have a weapon, and am willing to use it to make you have a bad day".

 

On the other hand, as I've already suggested in this same line of debate, intimidate could be a "dual-statistic" skill that uses your highest attribute between strength and intelligence or charisma as it's base. We aren't limited to speech skills being based entirely on charisma. We can tie them to whatever we like with a new system.

 

Anyhow, on a lighter note, Vin Diesel wins intimidate check before turning a guy's face into hamburger meat

Edited by BetrayTheWorld

"When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him." - Jonathan Swift

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...