Diplomacy: Middle Ground?

[Skjaldbakka]

How do you run interpersonal skill checks such as diplomacy?

I see uses of diplimacy as a scale. On the one side, you have the "I got a 27 diplomacy check, which means he likes me. Now I want him to do X,Y,Z for me, because he likes me". On the other side, you have the pure RP style diplomacy that punishes people for putting ranks into those skills, because they are never rolled, and the OOG charismatic guy with the stat-dumped Cha IG talks his way through scenarios, while the OOG average guy with a good IG cha can't fulfill his role of party face.

[Riffington]

Well, the RP method doesn't punish ranks if the DM is good. Because a good DM looks at your ranks when he's deciding how to evaluate your arguments.
Like when you say "and I know you are a very merciful king", but you have a Diplomacy bonus of -1, it sounds smarmy. If your bonus is higher, it sounds like appropriate praise.

A glib player who doesn't roughen up his speech as a character should be treated like he's a poncy ass by the other characters. A zero-tact player trying to play a high diplomacy character has a bit more trouble since he has chosen a character he is incapable of playing properly, just like if you play a character who's smarter than you. But the DM/other players can give him the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, where they wouldn't for a lower-Diplomacy character.

Unless all you mean is that it punishes excessive ranks (my +40 diplomacy is only a tiny bit better than his +20). The RP method works better for diplomacy scores that we as players can actually comprehend.

[Dairun Cates]

How do you run interpersonal skill checks such as diplomacy?

I see uses of diplimacy as a scale. On the one side, you have the "I got a 27 diplomacy check, which means he likes me. Now I want him to do X,Y,Z for me, because he likes me". On the other side, you have the pure RP style diplomacy that punishes people for putting ranks into those skills, because they are never rolled, and the OOG charismatic guy with the stat-dumped Cha IG talks his way through scenarios, while the OOG average guy with a good IG cha can't fulfill his role of party face.

In my experience, that's often not a problem. The OOG charismatic guy usually is the one who decides to play the IG charismatic guy because he's a sneaky manipulative ass and likes the challenge of overpowering his foes without laying a finger on them.

[mostlyharmful]

I've got a similar problem with Int in my group, the dwarf barb with the int 10 comes up with the plans, tactics and contingencies, his plans are coherent and generally come off well, he remembars what he's told and makes the connections in game with clues, puzzles and riddles while the sun elf wiz with an Int of 23 in game basically likes to hit things with a big magic hammer until they fall apart

[kamikasei]

I've got a similar problem with Int in my group, the dwarf barb with the int 10 comes up with the plans, tactics and contingencies, his plans are coherent and generally come off well, he remembars what he's told and makes the connections in game with clues, puzzles and riddles while the sun elf wiz with an Int of 23 in game basically likes to hit things with a big magic hammer until they fall apart

I forget where it was on these boards, but remember reading a suggestion that in that case you can have the intelligent character roll an Int check and have the intelligent player feed him ideas up to whatever the DM feels is appropriate for the check.

[Nowhere Girl]

I think with Charisma and Diplomacy, the best way to think of it is that the skill check isn't a measure of the quality of what you say so much as the delivery -- sort of like how with the best stand-up comedians, half of the effectiveness of their jokes lies not in the jokes themselves but in their deliveries.

Think of it like this:

James Earl Jones could say almost anything and make it sound sexy. Forget the content of the speech -- that smooth, deep, rich voice alone can practically hypnotise you into going along with him. He could probably read directly from the phone book and make it sound sexy and interesting.

Now consider Gilbert Gottfried. Give him any speech you want, even a deeply compelling, normally moving one. Can he do it? Can he make it sound moving, do you think? Can he do anything other than make it unintentionally amusing (or annoying, depending on your perspective), no matter what he says?

There's what happens when your player with the clever phrasing tries to act like a party face. He/she ends up being a verbose Gilbert Gottfried. Emphasize how the words come out sounding all wrong and annoying (perhaps even nasally), and go from there. I don't see any reason why someone who dumped Charisma should get to come off as a skillful diplomat just through "clever roleplay." That, if anything, is poor roleplay.

[Temp]

I forget where it was on these boards, but remember reading a suggestion that in that case you can have the intelligent character roll an Int check and have the intelligent player feed him ideas up to whatever the DM feels is appropriate for the check.

...
If you want to tell a player he's not all that bright (but his buddy is), go for it.

This seems to require incredible* tact to actually put into practice and then you just have one player obligated to either listen to his friend [with the apparently superior intellect] or look like a jerk. The "intelligent" group-member would also be put in an awkward spot.

For Diplomacy, I have my players state what they want to say and roll to see how well they deliver--whether they're fluent and influential or
stuttering and just generally unable to keep attention on themselves. I usually give them circumstantial modifiers based on the rationality of their OOC statements.

Do I actually give numeric values to these modifiers? Not really, but if they're close to success, I give them the extra push if they're reasonable. If they're not, I generally disregard the opposed roll entirely (unless it's a 1) and just say they fail.

*Literally--I wouldn't believe it possible to do without offending anyone.

[Mewtarthio]

...
If you want to tell a player he's not all that bright (but his buddy is) go for it.

This seems to require incredible* tact to actually put into practice and then you just have one player obligated to either listen to his friend [with the apparently superior intellect] or look like a jerk. The "intelligent" group-member would also be in an awkward position.

A better solution would be to let the players collaborate, and just have the most intelligent character "discover" the solution they agree upon (naturally, not all the time, just usually).

How about using Rich's variant? Then, Diplomacy just lets you fast forward through all the haggling.

[Blanks]

There are 2 considerations in my view:

1)
The ingame charismatic player should have an easier time.

2)
Roleplaying the encounter well should give some sort of benefit.

I usually adjust the success according to charisma/diplomacy. If the low-CHA guy can convince the guard to let him in, the high-CHA gets a guided tour if he succeeds.
I also increase the difficulty of the roleplaying if the player has low CHA ie:

(high cha):
Player: I really need to see my sick mother, she is in the castle *sob*
Guard: Offcourse, let me help you.

(low cha):
Player: I really need to see my sick mother, she is in the castle *sob*
Guard: Hmmm i dont remember any sick women in the castle, whats her name?
Player: erm.. her name is XXXX XXXX, she is a cook.
Guard: cook you say? Were she the one that made the lamb stew the other day? (no lamb stew the other day)
Player: No, i dont think so, she is ill and needs my help...
Guard: okay, get in, you got 1 hour before i come an get you.