[3.5] If you have Speak with Animal on yourself, can you use diplomacy?

[prototype00]

Lets say you have Speak with Animal on cast on you, can you then use Diplomacy to affect how likely an animal is to do something for you, or is it still Handle Animal?

prototype00

[Waker]

Not an area that I specialize in, but this snippet from the SRD might say no.

Influencing NPC Attitudes

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.
Now of course the RAI is there under the assumption that you can't communicate with animals, but RAW says that if you are dealing with an animal or magical beast, you use Wild Empathy, even if they are capable of speech.

[Zaq]

I think you're in "ask your GM" territory.

My gut says it makes sense to allow either (assuming good faith for both, not crazy broken Diplomancy). I can see an argument either way. Diplomacy makes sense because you can speak to them, which is different from how D&D rules you can interact with animals (most people talk to their pets and claim a level of understanding, but by RAW, animals don't speak Common). Handle Animal makes sense because even without a true language barrier, interacting with an INT 2 critter is markedly different from interacting with a normal humanoid.

[Anxe]

Other examples are Stone Tell and Speak with Plants. Both use almost the same language in their spell descriptions. They don't have stated mechanisms for influencing attitudes, but the phrasing indicates that they do have attitudes like other NPCs. With no other mechanism for influencing those attitudes, Diplomacy makes the most sense.

Carrying that back to Speak with Animals. Even though Wild Empathy and Handle Animal exist the similarity to the other spells indicates that Diplomacy becomes an option after you have a shared language. Maybe with some penalties determined by the DM, but complete denial of the skill doesn't seem reasonable to me.

[tomandtish]

I think (reading between the line), the issue is intelligence.

Diplomacy appears to work on "persons" (NPCs) because they are intelligent (3 or higher). You can make logical arguments with them.

Animals and magical beasts (INT 1-2) aren't intelligent enough to make a logical argument with. Wild Empathy works because you can read the emotional state well enough to judge your reactions accordingly.

So even if you can communicate, Diplomacy isn't going to help with the animals because they won't respond to it logically.

Plants and stone would depend on whether or not you decide it is intelligent once you can communicate with it.

[AnimeTheCat]

Plants and stone would depend on whether or not you decide it is intelligent once you can communicate with it.

and likewise, someone talking to a rock would make me question their intelligence.

[lylsyly]

Not an area that I specialize in, but this snippet from the SRD might say no.

Now of course the RAI is there under the assumption that you can't communicate with animals, but RAW says that if you are dealing with an animal or magical beast, you use Wild Empathy, even if they are capable of speech.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm

becomes a magical beast, speaks at least 1 language that the caster knows, INT becomes 3d6

Yet you still use wild empathy? Sounds like more WoTC dysfunction to me.

An Awakened creature may actually have a higher INT score than you, but since it is considered a Magical Beast you still have to use Wild Empathy instead of Diplomacy by RAW?

If it was my table, if you could communicate with it, you WOULD use Diplomacy instead of Wild Empathy

just my 2 cp
YMMV

[Anxe]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm

becomes a magical beast, speaks at least 1 language that the caster knows, INT becomes 3d6

Yet you still use wild empathy? Sounds like more WoTC dysfunction to me.

An Awakened creature may actually have a higher INT score than you, but since it is considered a Magical Beast you still have to use Wild Empathy instead of Diplomacy by RAW?

If it was my table, if you could communicate with it, you WOULD use Diplomacy instead of Wild Empathy

just my 2 cp
YMMV

Druids can have an INT of 3, right? Maybe the awakened beast uses Wild Empathy on the druid! :P

[lylsyly]

Druids can have an INT of 3, right? Maybe the awakened beast uses Wild Empathy on the druid! :P

but it is highly unlikely that the druid is a plant, animal, or magical beast ... :smallbiggrin:

[tomandtish]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm

becomes a magical beast, speaks at least 1 language that the caster knows, INT becomes 3d6

Yet you still use wild empathy? Sounds like more WoTC dysfunction to me.

An Awakened creature may actually have a higher INT score than you, but since it is considered a Magical Beast you still have to use Wild Empathy instead of Diplomacy by RAW?

If it was my table, if you could communicate with it, you WOULD use Diplomacy instead of Wild Empathy

just my 2 cp
YMMV

Yeah, to me this is a good example of when Diplomacy WOULD work. An Awakened creature is intelligent enough to be able to start reasoning with logically (although maybe poorly).

[Keltest]

Personally, I would say that you can use diplomacy, but your results will be extremely limited no matter how good you are at it because animals just don't have the same priorities as you do. You could convince a bear to share his cave with you if its big enough, for example, or convince a skunk that some guy who is chasing you needs to be sprayed because he's big and scary, but you aren't going to convince that bear to, say, run into the middle of town square and start dancing on its hind legs, because that's just beyond its comprehension.

[Waker]

Yet you still use wild empathy? Sounds like more WoTC dysfunction to me.

An Awakened creature may actually have a higher INT score than you, but since it is considered a Magical Beast you still have to use Wild Empathy instead of Diplomacy by RAW?

If it was my table, if you could communicate with it, you WOULD use Diplomacy instead of Wild Empathy

just my 2 cp
YMMV
Oh, I agree it's a dysfunction. But you asked "Can you use diplomacy", not "Would it make sense to use diplomacy." As I said, even using a magical beast known for talking such as a Sphinx, you are technically supposed to use Wild Empathy.
In any case, Handle Animal doesn't have an option to use it for improving attitudes. One could add that as a houserule, though it would diminish Wild Empathy. Even that is a simple fix though, just say Wild Empathy grants a +1 bonus per level on checks made to improve the attitude of an animal or magical beast.

[ShurikVch]

but it is highly unlikely that the druid is a plant, animal, or magical beast ... :smallbiggrin:Adu'ja (Dragon #317) and Volodni (Unapproachable East) are both Plants with Favored Class: Druid; the latter one even have Int penalty

[DEMON]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm

becomes a magical beast, speaks at least 1 language that the caster knows, INT becomes 3d6

Yet you still use wild empathy? Sounds like more WoTC dysfunction to me.


Not really, as wild empathy only works on magical beast with INT of 1 or 2:


A druid can also use this ability to influence a magical beast with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2, but she takes a -4 penalty on the check.

In my opinion, Speak with Animals should give you a circumstance bonus on the check, but should probably still rely on Wild Empathy, due to the animal's low intelligence. I'd also apply the circumstance bonus to Handle Animal checks. But that's just how I tend to rule it, YMMV.

[Necroticplague]

No, you still need to use Handle Animal or Wild Empathy. Even if you can get around the direct language issue through magic, you have to deal with the problems that an Animal's (or animal-level Magical Beasts) limited intelligence still makes getting concepts across difficult, especially if you're expecting some kind of back-and-force conversation. Remember when Speak with Animals says that stupid ones make inane comments, while wary ones are terse and evasive? You still need to use your understanding of animal intelligence, in order to work around those issues. This is what Handle Animal represents: you ability to cajole and manipulate animals. Being able to speak with them more directly is probably cause for a circumstance bonus, though.

[Anxe]

My point with the 3 INT druid joke was that the line between Wild Empathy and Diplomacy becomes blurred once shared language is no longer a barrier. Within the rules the only thing that separates a 3 INT character from a 2 INT character is a -1 modifier and the ability to speak. If we allow the 2 INT character to speak... Then there's very little that separates them from a theoretical perspective.

I definitely agree that the rules still have separations between those two types of characters. In a more general sense, the discussions on OOTS are more about RAW than RAI as RAW is either correct or not whereas RAI is... whatever you want it to be pretty much. My RAI is that Diplomacy could be used on an animal while you have Speak With Animals active, but with a penalty (-4 maybe?).

[tomandtish]

My point with the 3 INT druid joke was that the line between Wild Empathy and Diplomacy becomes blurred once shared language is no longer a barrier. Within the rules the only thing that separates a 3 INT character from a 2 INT character is a -1 modifier and the ability to speak. If we allow the 2 INT character to speak... Then there's very little that separates them from a theoretical perspective.

I definitely agree that the rules still have separations between those two types of characters. In a more general sense, the discussions on OOTS are more about RAW than RAI as RAW is either correct or not whereas RAI is... whatever you want it to be pretty much. My RAI is that Diplomacy could be used on an animal while you have Speak With Animals active, but with a penalty (-4 maybe?).

But the argument can be made that the difference between a 3 and a 2 is enlightned self-interest. It's now low enough that you are no longer a "person". The 2 lacks the ability for any reasoning at all, and can;t operate on anything but instinct, even if you can communicate with it. Any agreements are going to be extremely short term and based on emotion, not logic.

[lylsyly]

Diplomacy versus Wild Empathy

SRD Quotes

From Wild Empathy: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildEmpathy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildEmpathy)


Wild Empathy (Ex (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#extraordinaryAbilities))
A druid can improve the attitude of an animal. This ability functions just like a Diplomacy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm) check made to improve the attitude of a person. The druid rolls 1d20 and adds her druid level and her Charisma modifier to determine the wild empathy check result.
The typical domestic animal has a starting attitude of indifferent, while wild animals are usually unfriendly.
To use wild empathy, the druid and the animal must be able to study each other, which means that they must be within 30 feet of one another under normal conditions. Generally, influencing an animal in this way takes 1 minute but, as with influencing people, it might take more or less time.
A druid can also use this ability to influence a magical beast (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#magicalBeastType) with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2, but she takes a -4 penalty on the check.


From Diplomacy: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm)


Influencing NPC Attitudes

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 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#animalType) or magical beast (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#magicalBeastType).

(I skipped the table)

So the Druid obviously does not use Wild Empathy on intelligent Magical Beasts.

From Owl, Giant: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/owlGiant.htm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/owlGiant.htm)


Training A Giant Owl

Although intelligent, a giant owl requires training before it can bear a rider in combat. To be trained, a giant owl must have a friendly attitude toward the trainer (this can be achieved through a successful Diplomacy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm) check).

And here is an instance of diplomacy definitely being used with an intelligent magical beast

So, my determination is that even by RAW (albeit poorly defined) Wild Empathy is used for non intelligent animals and magical beasts (even if you can communicate with them), and Diplomacy for Intelligent Creatures (of course you have to be able to communicate with them as well).

Sorry to drag this back up after a few days :smallredface: but I have been in a diplomacy(face) mode for two weeks now.

Now I have to figure out how to get wild empathy on a changeling rogue but is the subject of another thread. :smallmad:

[eggynack]

Yeah, I don't think that influencing attitudes text precludes the use of diplomacy on magical beasts or even animals. You can use diplomacy on NPC's. You can use wild empathy on magical beasts. Thus, when dealing with a creature that is both an NPC or a magical beast, such as an intelligent magical beast, you can use either diplomacy or wild empathy. However, the rules seem to preclude the use of wild empathy on intelligent magical beasts, so you're stuck with just diplomacy. No rules contradiction involved.

This argument makes the speak with animal issue a bit weird though, and for one simple reason. That being, is an animal a character? If not, do they become one when you start talking to them. Not sure how to evaluate that one. Character is said to be nearly synonymous with creature, but maybe it's not wholly synonymous in this sense. Might be worth looking through the text to see if there's any kind of stable definition of character in general, or NPC in the specific.