01-21-2010, 01:20 PM | #21 | |
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, U.K.
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
This also raises a related question in my mind. What happens when the GM hasn't pre-decided on an NPC's attitude to the PC and decides to use a Reaction roll to guide them in this (as per p.B494 it appears to be the GM doing this, not the player)? Does not the official interpretation above imply that the PC should not be allowed to use Influence rolls to change this attitude? And if the GM is rolling for "first impressions" of the NPC in this way, that suggests to me that game-mechanically players must decide how they are going to "influence" an NPC before the PCs themselves have had a chance to get any impression of the NPC. Because, to get a feel for which approach would best work, requires that the GM has already rolled for the general Reaction of the NPC, in order for the PCs to have something to perceive, surely? EDIT: to try and summarise my many bouncing thoughts here, it seems to me that the "official" EITHER/OR statement above is creating a "chicken and egg" situation, in some types of NPC interaction at least. Last edited by Joseph R; 01-21-2010 at 01:26 PM. |
|
01-21-2010, 01:34 PM | #22 | |
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
Note that I wouldn't give people a -2 penalty for that "re-attempt," as you really can't say that the guy feels the PCs are becoming a nuisance when they've just tried to influence him for the first time. And yes, the PCs should be able to decide to use an influence skill after the reaction roll is in play--after all, to decide you need to influence someone, you need to first have time to recognize that you're not already getting what you need! Last edited by Sdrolion; 01-21-2010 at 01:36 PM. Reason: Clarification II |
|
01-21-2010, 01:44 PM | #23 | |
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, U.K.
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
|
|
01-21-2010, 01:54 PM | #24 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
Some reaction roll results allow a further roll, with a bonus or penalty in some cases. I don't see any reason you couldn't substitute an influence roll. And since the outcome of an influence roll is normally a Good or Bad reaction, if that result allows a further reaction roll, you could do a second influence roll instead. I don't think there's really a "first impressions" roll as such. The roll governs the whole social transaction. Now if you want to ask for a bit more than you originally got, I might sometimes allow that . . . but probably at a penalty, since you're pushing. Bill Stoddard |
|
01-22-2010, 02:51 AM | #25 | |
Join Date: Dec 2009
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
Although it might create an odd situation if the GM has already made a secret Reaction roll for his own reason and then forbids the player from attempting an Influence roll. |
|
01-22-2010, 10:05 AM | #26 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
That said, it wouldn't be unreasonable to impose a penalty to influence rolls against NPCs who tend to make snap judgements. I'd call it -1 to -3, depending on how fast the NPC usually decides on someone. |
|
01-22-2010, 11:00 AM | #27 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Quote:
For what it's worth, I made exactly the same interpretation you did, and followed it in GMing several campaigns! I had occasion to discuss the matter with Kromm, and learned that he read the rules otherwise. Bill Stoddard |
|
01-22-2010, 12:24 PM | #28 |
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Re: Influence Skills and Interrogation
Thanks very much to everyone for all your help and input. I think I have a good understanding of these things now. :-)
Happy gaming! |
Tags |
gurps, influence skills, interrogation, reaction rolls |
|
|