How to deal with internet characters?

[KnotKnormal]

one of my players ,through massive stat rolls and feats, has effectively turned himself into the internet of the D&D universe. when ever this character comes across a puzzle he can effectively know the answer from rolling anything above a Nat 1 Fail. he can instantly make any enemy his friend because diplomacy has no save and he can lie his ass off to anyone with no fear of repercussion. all of his int based skills are around 130 before rolling. (I checked it, its lagit with how I had hem roll there characters)

How do a stop or at least manage the this ability and not have the enemy armies turn around because he said hi.

[Uncle Pine]

So what's his build?

EDIT: And what level are we talking about?
EDIT_2: How about a natural 1 on a save or die during the surprise round? ... Surprise!

[Nettlekid]

There are two things you can do as DM. One is just let him do all that. If you make puzzles and battles and this player is okay with just not solving the puzzle and not fighting the battle, then on the one hand, if they're enjoying themselves (and other people are too) then there's no issue, but more likely they'll quickly realize "Wait this is really boring, I want to actually play the game I'm playing instead of saying 'I win.'"

The other thing you could do is just not have these things work. Yeah, Diplomacy doesn't have a save, but would ANY army turn away because some guy said something really clever in about 6 seconds? His rolls don't matter; as the DM you control the NPCs, and you can assign circumstance penalties to actions depending on circumstances. If he's trying to talk down a thousand charging soldiers, perhaps he gets a cumulative -1 circumstance penalty for each soldier who wants to disembowel him at the moment. If he's trying to bluff to a Red Dragon that giving him all its treasure is a good idea, maybe he gets a cumulative -1 circumstance penalty for each year the dragon has been alive, or for every adventurer who's tried much the same (which could be hundreds). These are reasonable statements, and make the game play out as they reasonably should. If he gets an hour of conversation with the king's adviser in a tavern? Yeah, he can probably completely win over that guy. Three seconds jabbering at a Mind Flayer enclave? Probably not as successful.

As for the solving of the puzzles, you can say as DM "Your character solves it right away, because he's clever. However, I'm DM and I put a lot of work into this thing, so you *player* had better at least give it a passing thought!" If the player does or doesn't solve it, the character did, so the story can continue, but at least you get a little interaction.

[OldTrees1]

Wait. He can get over 130 on Int based skills and Diplomacy(a Cha based skill)?

This sounds like one of:
1) You both are mistaken about some of the rules.
2) You are using too low of DCs for the level you are playing at (Fix diplomacy by not using the RAW diplomacy DCs)
3) The player is use mild theoretical optimization levels of optimization
4) Your houserule (with how I had hem roll there characters) had unintentional side effects. In which case we need to know the houserule.

[KnotKnormal]

There are two things you can do as DM. One is just let him do all that. If you make puzzles and battles and this player is okay with just not solving the puzzle and not fighting the battle, then on the one hand, if they're enjoying themselves (and other people are too) then there's no issue, but more likely they'll quickly realize "Wait this is really boring, I want to actually play the game I'm playing instead of saying 'I win.'"

The other thing you could do is just not have these things work. Yeah, Diplomacy doesn't have a save, but would ANY army turn away because some guy said something really clever in about 6 seconds? His rolls don't matter; as the DM you control the NPCs, and you can assign circumstance penalties to actions depending on circumstances. If he's trying to talk down a thousand charging soldiers, perhaps he gets a cumulative -1 circumstance penalty for each soldier who wants to disembowel him at the moment. If he's trying to bluff to a Red Dragon that giving him all its treasure is a good idea, maybe he gets a cumulative -1 circumstance penalty for each year the dragon has been alive, or for every adventurer who's tried much the same (which could be hundreds). These are reasonable statements, and make the game play out as they reasonably should. If he gets an hour of conversation with the king's adviser in a tavern? Yeah, he can probably completely win over that guy. Three seconds jabbering at a Mind Flayer enclave? Probably not as successful.

As for the solving of the puzzles, you can say as DM "Your character solves it right away, because he's clever. However, I'm DM and I put a lot of work into this thing, so you *player* had better at least give it a passing thought!" If the player does or doesn't solve it, the character did, so the story can continue, but at least you get a little interaction.

Thank you very much for the excellent advice. Very helpful.

[Red Fel]

With regard to puzzle-solving, not every puzzle is visible. If you don't know there's a puzzle there, you can't solve it. The perfect example of this is the concealed trap - if you don't know it's there, you're not going to disarm it before it goes off.

With regard to his Diplomacy checks, there are some creatures that cannot be diplomanced - for example, a creature that does not understand your language or a creature with no Int (or animal) score. Let him try to convince a Dire Bear that you come in peace.

Finally, as Nettle mentions, at least have the player give a show of trying. He doesn't have to actually know every puzzle solution, or be able to smooth-talk every adversary, anymore than the Barbarian should be able to actually leap his own height, but he should be able to at least present an out-of-character attempt. ("This puzzle is about the colors of the liquids, right? My guy knows color patterns." "This is a demon on the Prime, right? That means he's after something else. I can use that to get him off our case.")

The key point, however, is this: If this really bothers you (or the other players!), don't use in-character consequences to deal with his out-of-character choices. Tell him that it bothers you that he can roll some skill checks to get a 95% chance to bypass your plot devices. If he understands, he might try to tone it down himself, problem solved. If he's obstinate, remind him of Rule 0.

And if it doesn't bother you, what's the big deal?

[KnotKnormal]

Wait. He can get over 130 on Int based skills and Diplomacy(a Cha based skill)?

This sounds like one of:
1) You both are mistaken about some of the rules.
2) You are using too low of DCs for the level you are playing at (Fix diplomacy by not using the RAW diplomacy DCs)
3) The player is use mild theoretical optimization levels of optimization
4) Your houserule (with how I had hem roll there characters) had unintentional side effects. In which case we need to know the houserule.

He has a feat that applies his int modifier to his skills, I'll have to ask him what it's called again. cant remember the name right now.

[KnotKnormal]

If he's obstinate, remind him of Rule 0.


I don't think I know that rule.

[TheIronGolem]

Rule 0 is "The DM makes the rules".

It's a blunt instrument, but it's there when you need it, and sooner or later every DM does.

You may want to take a look at Rich Burlew's diplomacy fix and consider using it or something similar. If nothing else, it's a great breakdown of the problems with the Diplomacy skill, and will give you an idea of why Diplomancers are a thing.

Also, I'll second OldTrees1's suspicions that something is up with the numbers. Is this the same player from your other thread about the lance-firing chainguns? Oh, epic levels, huh?. Never mind.

[OldTrees1]

He has a feat that applies his int modifier to his skills, I'll have to ask him what it's called again. cant remember the name right now.

That still doesn't explain the 130.
Are you playing an Epic level game?
Did you give everyone 1 stat of 200?
Is he using 50 fine sized minions that are making aid another checks?

[KnotKnormal]

That still doesn't explain the 130.
Are you playing an Epic level game?
Did you give everyone 1 stat of 200?
Is he using 50 fine sized minions that are making aid another checks?

Epic level campaign... 4D6 re-roll 1s and 2s 6s explode +40. I think he has about a 120 in int.

[Sith_Happens]

Epic level campaign... 4D6 re-roll 1s and 2s 6s explode +40. I think he has about a 120 in int.

Yeah, that'll do it. Although once you're epic enough the kind of shenanigans described in the OP are pretty much par for the course anyways.

[KnotKnormal]

Yeah, that'll do it. Although once you're epic enough the kind of shenanigans described in the OP are pretty much par for the course anyways.

I know and I totally expected it, I just trying to find ways to manage the issue. which Nettlekid came up with a fantastic solution to the problems that come up.

[Studoku]

Epic level campaign... 4D6 re-roll 1s and 2s 6s explode +40. I think he has about a 120 in int.
If you're letting players be this absurdly powerful, you need to either give them appropriate challenges or accept that, since they are basically deities, they will stomp any other challenge without breaking a sweat.

Your players are supposed to be on par with gods with the stats you gave them, right? Certain challenges such as simple knowledge checks are not going to be or supposed to be a challenge for them.

If your epic level characters are rolling Bluff checks in the triple digits, they should be dealing with adversaries with similar Sense Motive scores. Diplomacy is a little harder thanks to the flat DCs- look at the houserules in the above posts, particularly Rich's.

[Seerow]

I know and I totally expected it, I just trying to find ways to manage the issue. which Nettlekid came up with a fantastic solution to the problems that come up.

Frankly, you're playing an epic campaign and specifically houseruled in stuff to make characters even more powerful.

As a player, I'd be pretty irritated if after you went through the trouble of making characters so much more powerful than normal, you started arbitrarily nerfing my character because you didn't like the results of your own poorly thought out decisions.

[Ziegander]

So... WHAT?!

In your Epic-level campaign, characters' ability scores are either 12, 13, 14, 15, or 48, 124, or 180?

Uh... and you are surprised someone was powerful?

First: You brought this on yourself.

Second: Epic-level skill checks are pathetically weak (with the exception of Diplomacy, though it can be matched by non-Epic spellcasting).

Third: You probably should have just played a level 11+ game with optimized spellcasters and found out what happens to D&D when players care to go all out before exposing yourself to the onslaught of number fatigue which happens when the system gets to too high levels. The outcome is basically the same, but at least you have spellcasting to blame.

[Yawgmoth]

Yeah if you're giving PCs stats of 120 to start and playing in high-epic levels, you really brought this upon yourself. 3e starts breaking down at about 14th level, and at every level past 20 the decay is exponential.

Also, if your players are just bypassing puzzles by rolling then they probably just don't like puzzles. Some people like traps/puzzles in their game, others don't. Trying to force the issue only leads to suffering.

[KnotKnormal]

If you're letting players be this absurdly powerful, you need to either give them appropriate challenges or accept that, since they are basically deities, they will stomp any other challenge without breaking a sweat.

Your players are supposed to be on par with gods with the stats you gave them, right? Certain challenges such as simple knowledge checks are not going to be or supposed to be a challenge for them.

If your epic level characters are rolling Bluff checks in the triple digits, they should be dealing with adversaries with similar Sense Motive scores. Diplomacy is a little harder thanks to the flat DCs- look at the houserules in the above posts, particularly Rich's.

It is a god killing campaign so im not having issues combat wise, but when the god has a million man army charging you and the player says "these are not the droids you are looking for" and the entire goes home, I have an issue. I would prefer he use his spell casting to suck them all into a black hole. same result but he is using spells which makes later encounters that day more difficult.

And I have no issue with them making simple knowledge check but I don't want them licking the air and going BBEG is that way and skipping the campaign I had set up.

[Studoku]

It is a god killing campaign so im not having issues combat wise, but when the god has a million man army charging you and the player says "these are not the droids you are looking for" and the entire goes home, I have an issue. I would prefer he use his spell casting to suck them all into a black hole. same result but he is using spells which makes later encounters that day more difficult.
There are dozens of ways to make your million man armies immune to diplomacy. Just make them all shout very loudly should be enough to make it difficult to talk to them. If this doesn't work, make the army of something mindless or mind-controlled if you want to stop PCs negotiating with them.

Actually, if you do want your army of humanoid followers, just have them be Fanatics.

The attitude of fanatic is added here. In addition to the obvious effects, any NPC whose attitude is fanatic gains a +2 morale bonus to Strength and Constitution scores, a +1 morale bonus on Will saves, and a -1 penalty to AC whenever fighting for the character or his or her cause. This attitude will remain for one day plus one day per point of the character’s Charisma bonus, at which point the NPC’s attitude will revert to its original attitude (or indifferent, if no attitude is specified).
Treat the fanatic attitude as a mind-affecting enchantment effect for purposes of immunity, save bonuses, or being detected by the Sense Motive skill. Since it is nonmagical, it can’t be dispelled; however, any effect that suppresses or counters mind-affecting effects will affect it normally. A fanatic NPC’s attitude can’t be further adjusted by the use of skills.
A deity of this level should have no problem accomplishing this, especially if they're going to send millions of worshippers at a target capable of wiping them out.

I'm still not sure what you expect that army to accomplish against an epic level party though.

And I have no issue with them making simple knowledge check but I don't want them licking the air and going BBEG is that way and skipping the campaign I had set up.
Then don't let them. Knowledge checks don't allow you to know things people have no way of knowing, such as where in his own personal realm the divination-immune god is hiding.

It should give them useful clues of course but if they're skipping the entire campaign with their skill checks then you're not throwing appropriate challenges at them.

[Baroknik]

It is a god killing campaign so im not having issues combat wise, but when the god has a million man army charging you and the player says "these are not the droids you are looking for" and the entire goes home, I have an issue. I would prefer he use his spell casting to suck them all into a black hole. same result but he is using spells which makes later encounters that day more difficult.

And I have no issue with them making simple knowledge check but I don't want them licking the air and going BBEG is that way and skipping the campaign I had set up.

To me, it sounds like you just need the villains to be smarter. Look up some ways wizards auto win and have your villains maintain similar levels of paranoia/mechanics-savvy.

On that note, make the true BBEG a level 21 wizard with normal stats. Assuming he's played right, he still wins if you want him to.

[JusticeZero]

Why? The character can out think and out do the gods. Given what he got, he earned his abilities fairly. If he can throw around skill checks good enough to do those things, let him. Don't go "Oh. the Wizard can do it because magic" without giving the rest of the abilities their place, or you are Gym Ratting it up in the worst ways.

[Zweisteine]

To deal with the diplomacy problem, you have five options.

1. Use alternate diplomacy rules, because diplomacy is broken. I understand that the Giant's version (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9606632&postcount=2) works somewhat more effectively than standard rules.

2. Roleplay. Don't let the character run his entire diplomacy off of a roll. If an army is facing him, have him actually try to convince them. Sure, a few guys might desert if he's convincing enough, but an army has orders, and they shouldn't obey a random guy standing in their way. More likely, the commanders will order him shot dead or overrun before he has the opportunity to convince anyone of anything (as soon as he starts talking, they'll kill him, because he might be able to take over their army).

There are two ways to implement that effectively. One is to add conditional modifiers to all diplomacy DCs. For example, the DC to convince a hostile general to surrender when he has an enormous advantage (i.e. army vs 10 adventurers) would be "too high to meet, ever." In other words, make sure there's always a chance of failure if he's playing entirely off of the dice. The other method is to not base diplomacy entirely off of the dice. Make him convince people in reality as well. He can't just say "I roll diplomacy to convince them to give up." Make him say "soldiers of the army of [nation]; I bring you a message that your cause is hopeless, etc," but replace etc with actual arguments.

3. The third message is to limit optimization to the feasible. If you do this (or the previous method), be sure to let him remake his character. This method is the least kind, because optimization varies so widely that the gray area of "low-op" is very, very hard to identify clearly.


The fourth and final in-character option is to remove the character from the game. Present him with a final challenge, perhaps talking a god (maybe a god of knowledge of some sort, like Vecna, or a similar, lesser deity) into giving him his godhood. When he succeeds, the character ascends, and becomes an NPC. Be sure to discuss this with the player beforehand, and make it overlap into the next solution.

The best solution is to talk to the player. Tell him that his over-optimization is making the game less fun, and that he needs to cut back. There's a reason that it's called "theoretical optimization." If he doesn't use them already, point him here to share his creations, but tell him to keep the theoretical away from the practical. Then get his character out of the game, perhaps through the previous method, and have him make a new character, maybe even the first priest of the newly ascended god.

[SiuiS]

Wait. He can get over 130 on Int based skills and Diplomacy(a Cha based skill)?

This sounds like one of:
1) You both are mistaken about some of the rules.
2) You are using too low of DCs for the level you are playing at (Fix diplomacy by not using the RAW diplomacy DCs)
3) The player is use mild theoretical optimization levels of optimization
4) Your houserule (with how I had hem roll there characters) had unintentional side effects. In which case we need to know the houserule.

The single most overlooked part of the interaction rules is that preexisting circumstances always modify the DC and the roll, and that similar to Bluff (which specified at one point your bluff could outright fail despite a successful roll because they believe you but aren't willing to risk doing what you say because Consequences) you have to have context for these things.

What happens if you meet a strange man, diplomance him and he turns out to be an insane extra dimensional being who feels the best way to make you shine is to make your death and the breaking of your life so tragic that it shines in the hearts and songs of men forever? Sure, humans and human-likes think "zealous" means obedience and worship, but faeries? Protection is removing you from your mortal coil so you don't suffer the rigors of age. Devils engage you in deep, labyrinthine discussions to allow you to demonstrate your fantastic mental faculties. Demons maim you because to suffer well and withstand the torment is to demonstrate the pure strength they value. The ice queen of Nefferenyah gets jealous when you are away for more than two nights and actively sabotaged your adventures to bring you home.


Because "Likes you a lot" doesn't mean "is no longer an NPC with individual hopes, dreams, flaws and ambitions".

[JusticeZero]

A big issue here is that the ridiculous house rules, projected onto a character far beyond the point where "realism" goes and curls up in a corner to whimper, means that the very minor power that a non-wizard has to affect the world is being magnified to a point which is, well, completely reasonable within the system for a character at the level of skill of a bad self-insertion fanfiction character compared to Lovecraftian horrors.
Seriously, this is like giving someone, knowingly, unbridled reality warping powers, then complaining that they use it to open doors out of sequence. Then saying that it would have been A-OK for the other guy on the team to be able to do it, to add injury to insult.

[Zweisteine]

Having read the thread more carefully, I revise my opinion.

An epic character focused on diplomacy (or on charisma-stuff in general) should be able to talk an army down. Just make sure they have a way to stop an attack first (magically-enhanced STOP. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0475.html) should work), or the army will charge before they have a chance.

Remember, epic character should be obscenely powerful, and that's without +40 to any ability scores at all. If they are facing any realistic army (at worst, all low-level warriors, at best, a legion of devils), they should be able to win relatively easily.

But of course, that should never work on appropriately-leveled encounters, which is what they should be facing. If there's an army, make the general have as high a charisma as he needs, so he can always rally his troops to fight, whether or not the PCs talked them down. (Though don't expect a low-level army to stand long against an epic fighter.)

[Baroknik]

On that note, NPC-PC equity is important. Do major NPCs have stat gen similar to PCs? If they do, just make his mirror. Or just have them appear before a mirror of opposition, or have an ICe Assassin show up, or halve inevitables take notice, or an Aleax of him appears.

There are lots of ways to have his clone show up...
If he doesn't like that... He should realize that that level of power always presents problems.

[CombatOwl]

one of my players ,through massive stat rolls and feats, has effectively turned himself into the internet of the D&D universe. when ever this character comes across a puzzle he can effectively know the answer from rolling anything above a Nat 1 Fail. he can instantly make any enemy his friend because diplomacy has no save and he can lie his ass off to anyone with no fear of repercussion. all of his int based skills are around 130 before rolling. (I checked it, its lagit with how I had hem roll there characters)

How do a stop or at least manage the this ability and not have the enemy armies turn around because he said hi.

Knowledge rolls don't have to give answers, merely information.

Diplomancy is a harder problem to solve, though not impossible. For one--you're the DM, you can assess whatever situational penalties you want. If you want to assess a -100 penalty on diplomacy checks when weapons are drawn, that's entirely within your prerogative. Alternately, let people realize the terrible consequences of getting exactly what they want. Just because someone is trying to be helpful (because of your diplomacy check) does not mean they will be competent, or useful, or even that they will actually be helpful. All it means is that they'll try. Maybe they consider it "helpful" to stab someone else in the back to save the Diplomancer from their inevitable betrayal in the future. Even if that someone may be a party member, or an important NPC, or whatever. Pull the same stupid tricks you pull when someone uses charm person in ridiculous ways.

[The Grue]

There are dozens of ways to make your million man armies immune to diplomacy. Just make them all shout very loudly should be enough to make it difficult to talk to them. If this doesn't work, make the army of something mindless or mind-controlled if you want to stop PCs negotiating with them.

Better idea: read the rules.


Changing others’ attitudes with Diplomacy generally takes at least 1 full minute (10 consecutive full-round actions). In some situations, this time requirement may greatly increase. A rushed Diplomacy check can be made as a full-round action, but you take a -10 penalty on the check.

Emphasis mine. The rules are silent on how many creatures are affected, but the DC table implies that number is "one":


Use the table below to determine the effectiveness of Diplomacy checks (or Charisma checks) made to influence the attitude of a nonplayer character, or wild empathy checks made to influence the attitude of an animal or magical beast.

Note the singular pronoun. This is the only indication given in the SRD with regards to the number of characters affected by a Diplomacy check.

Conclusions:


A Diplomacy check takes one minute and affects a single character
A Diplomacy check can be done in six seconds at a -10 penalty, still affecting a single character
The DM has carte blanche to fudge, ignore, or extend the time taken however much he wishes, any time he wants


If you want to be charitable to your epic Diplomancer, charming the million-man army takes 1 week, 4 days, 13 hours, 46 minutes and 40 seconds.

If he doesn't want the -10 penalty, charming the army takes 2 years, 2 days 10 hours and 40 minutes.

And if you want to invoke the rule's Notwithstanding Clause, it takes as long as you want it to take.

Either way, he's not charming the entire army before they gut him.

[CombatOwl]

Better idea: read the rules.



Emphasis mine.

Conclusions:


A Diplomacy check takes one minute and affects a single character
A Diplomacy check can be done in six seconds at a -10 penalty, still affecting a single character
The DM has carte blanche to fudge, ignore, or extend the time taken however much he wishes, any time he wants


If you want to be charitable to your epic Diplomancer, charming the million-man army takes 1 week, 4 days, 13 hours, 46 minutes and 40 seconds.

If he doesn't want the -10 penalty, charming the army takes 2 years, 2 days 10 hours and 40 minutes.

And if you want to invoke the rule's Notwithstanding Clause, it takes as long as you want it to take.

Either way, he's not charming the entire army before they gut him.

Nothing in the rules say that Diplomacy works on only one character at a time.

[The Grue]

Edited my post to address your comment.

[CombatOwl]

Edited my post to address your comment.

All that means is that the table's DCs are only applicable to single characters; not that the skill cannot affect groups.

"You can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check," that's plural, not singular.

[JusticeZero]

Maybe they consider it "helpful" to stab someone else in the back to save the Diplomancer from their inevitable betrayal in the future. Even if that someone may be a party member, or an important NPC, or whatever. Pull the same stupid tricks you pull when someone uses charm person in ridiculous ways.
When GMs pull ridiculous backside pulls to railroad people out of being able to use their own abilities, it's really not a shining example of good GMing. If characters can solve a problem easily, that problem is no longer a challenge, and trying to railroad it into being a challenge is just awful technique. "You're in a hedge maze." "We can all fly." "Um, um, there's a freak wind pattern over the top of the hedges that pushes you down so you can't go over the hedges." "We can cut the hedges." "Um, um, the hedges are made out of adamantine and they're totally unable to be cut." You're the one who gave them those tools!

[Fouredged Sword]

With a charisma of 168 the army shouldn't attack in the first place. They bow down before the supernatural beauty and force of personality before them. He should basically get away with flat immunity to anything <20 HD and capable of being effected by diplomacy. It's his thing, let him have it.

He knows everything known by mortal minds. The only puzzles he cannot grasp are built using far realms geography. For those he needs graphs. Then he has to burn the graphs before they cause someone's head to explode.

You are playing high epic. Let him be high epic.

That said, there must be an opposing force. Be it inevitables set on a task, though their hearts weep at the though of harming such a soul, they exist for a reason, and will kill their hearts to carry it out. Or saldi, beings of chaos who kill what they love. Or devils who know not OF love, or angels, filled with the love of their god to blot out the sun that is your character's soul.

Basically, let him have his epic. Fait some reason diplomacy fails. Everything he says is taken as the gossiple truth by everything in creation, but sometimes no amount of talking will work.

[CombatOwl]

When GMs pull ridiculous backside pulls to railroad people out of being able to use their own abilities, it's really not a shining example of good GMing.

It's not an example of good playing to set your character up as a roadblock to the story. Shutting that nonsense down is good GMing. When players create characters obviously unsuited to adventuring with a party, letting that nonsense continue is bad GMing. Paradoxically, because of the stupid diplomacy rules, diplomancers are entirely unsuited to actual play because they shut so many adventures down completely. Letting players continue trivializing the adventure is far worse form than slapping stupidly overpowered abilities with a nerf bat.


If characters can solve a problem easily, that problem is no longer a challenge, and trying to railroad it into being a challenge is just awful technique. "You're in a hedge maze." "We can all fly."

It's certainly not awful technique to get rid of or hinder characters intentionally built to shut down every encounter.

[The Grue]

All that means is that the table's DCs are only applicable to single characters; not that the skill cannot affect groups.

"You can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check," that's plural, not singular.

Let me quote the entire passage.


You can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check; see the Influencing NPC Attitudes sidebar, below, for basic DCs.

Emphasis mine. Again, the table referred to specifically applies to a single NPC at a time.

I agree the wording in the first clause is ambiguous, but it defers to the second clause which in turn defers to the sidebar quoted earlier. Said sidebar is quite clear about the number of NPCs influenced.

Specific trumps general, isn't that the rule?

[CombatOwl]

Let me quote the entire passage.



Emphasis mine. Again, the table referred to specifically applies to a single NPC at a time.

Sure, for the basic DC. The DC for affecting a group will be something else, not stated.


I agree the wording in the first clause is ambiguous, but it defers to the second clause which in turn defers to the sidebar quoted earlier. Said sidebar is quite clear about the number of NPCs influenced.

It's also clear that it's only basic guidelines on the DC.

[Zweisteine]

Also, make sure that the entire army can hear him. That's important. And if he's shouting to be heard, that's a penalty to diplomacy, because shouting is rude.


Best way to counter: The army is led by a diplomancer, a strategist, and a weaponsmaster. One is optimized for leadership (diplomacy, not the feat (maybe)), one for intelligence/casting, and the third for combat. The diplomancer has the entire army fanatic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#diplomacy); they won't go against him for anything. Sure, a PC can try to convince them to surrender, but they're already convinced that their leader is always right, so they can't be swayed (DC=the diplomancer's diplomacy bonus+10 +10 more for each day they've served him, to a maximum DC of 200 or 500). The other two exist to coordinate the army and keep the diplomancer safe.

If the diplomancer has leadership (the feat) (and epic leadership, etc), the weaponmaster can be his cohort, and the followers are even less likely to disobey him.

If the diplomancer is an epic thrallherd (i.e. his thralls/believers qualify him for leadership-related feats (one for stronger thrall, a few for more believers), the army is psychically bound to obey him; as far as they are concerned, he is a god. They cannot be taken from his side by any means short of direct control (charm person, dominate person, etc.) or death.

[The Grue]

It's also clear that it's only basic guidelines on the DC.

Quite correct, which brings me back to point number 3: Since the rules are silent with regards to multiple NPCs, Diplomancing an entire army takes as long as the DM wants it to take.