Friends, Hirelings, and Side-Kicks

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by restlessgriffin

You do realize Leadership is a REQUIRED skill for Knight and Holy Warrior!

You do realize it's a 12 right? So likely to fail in combat or stressful conditions.

And no one else has it as a required skill, so better hope you have either a Knight or Holy Warrior if you're deciding that Leadership is the only way to convince NPCs to do what the PC's want...


And if you check through the other Proffesions, no one (except Bards) really get any social skills above a 12 to start, which means they are meant to be rather terrible at social encounters, which aren't meant to be common in DFRPG.

Which is why when I'm not running "generic" DFRPG I give out more points to be used for buying more social skills, or simply making the few they get, slightly better.

That was the entire thrust of the first three sentences I wrote.

If players have control of NPCs/hirelings, why would they EVER increase Leadership.

There are other reasons (Rallying Cry comes to mind), but mostly, and I say this from experience, make social skills broadly more useful (and required) or your Players will still just ignore Leadership. Trust me, if you run DFRPG the way it's meant to be (and so far you aren't doing anything off-book), PCs won't care about boosting tertiary Skills like Leadership, unless "being a leader of men" is the Character's shtick.



I allow anyone to buy any of the social skills at chargen (not just with their 5 Quirk points, but like I said, I give out more than 250 points for a bit more customization, or I use something more akin to Delvers to Grow instead of porffession templates), so to make Born War Leader have some more utility (it's a pretty subpar advantage, few Players want it or buy more of it) I allow it to treat Leadership like Diplomacy. So if a PC has both, then they can never make things worse by making a Leadership Reaction Roll. Also I add the Soldier skill to my games and have BWL add to it as well. I also use Tactics at the start of every fight to give advantages to the side that wins the Tactics roll* and I use Strategy to assist with planning long journey's or if the PCs actually try to plan out a mission before jumping into it.


* I've toyed with different things like adding to one side's Initiative, giving out bonus uses of Luck or Serendipity, etc. Otherwise a lot of these skills end up playing third fiddle and never get increased.

[restlessgriffin]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

You do realize it's a 12 right? So likely to fail in combat or stressful conditions.

12 is competent. It'll fail if they get overly complicated in the directions. If they properly prep the combatants the rolls will get a positive modifier. And yes, it's only a 12, which is one reason they want to INCREASE Leadership.

And no one else has it as a required skill, so better hope you have either a Knight or Holy Warrior if you're deciding that Leadership is the only way to convince NPCs to do what the PC's want...

Not the only way, just the most directly applicable to combat. The NPC hirelings/side-kicks UNLIKE PCs are going to want to be lead. It's what they're there for!

[quote]And if you check through the other Proffesions, no one (except Bards) really get any social skills above a 12 to start, which means they are meant to be rather terrible at social encounters, which aren't meant to be common in DFRPG.

Yes, to START. Also it is good that Bard actually has SOMETHING to be good at.

Which is why when I'm not running "generic" DFRPG I give out more points to be used for buying more social skills, or simply making the few they get, slightly better.

Which is why I have no issue running at the standard starting points and making it clear there WILL be social interaction and roleplaying even in COMBAT. Also note, it is good to have some failure, it provides conflict and drives future improvement.

I allow anyone to buy any of the social skills at chargen (not just with their 5 Quirk points, but like I said, I give out more than 250 points for a bit more customization, or I use something more akin to Delvers to Grow instead of porffession templates), so to make Born War Leader have some more utility (it's a pretty subpar advantage, few Players want it or buy more of it) I allow it to treat Leadership like Diplomacy. So if a PC has both, then they can never make things worse by making a Leadership Reaction Roll. Also I add the Soldier skill to my games and have BWL add to it as well. I also use Tactics at the start of every fight to give advantages to the side that wins the Tactics roll* and I use Strategy to assist with planning long journey's or if the PCs actually try to plan out a mission before jumping into it.

Please expand on Leadership being used like Diplomacy? I may or may not want to do similar but you have my interest. Tactics sounds like pretty much RAW. Anyway, that's the way I've always viewed it.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by restlessgriffin

Please expand on Leadership being used like Diplomacy? I may or may not want to do similar but you have my interest. Tactics sounds like pretty much RAW. Anyway, that's the way I've always viewed it.

Diplomacy is different from other influence rolls (Exploits pg 10) in that "Exception: If you used Diplomacy, the GM will also make a regular reaction roll and use the better of the two reactions."

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by restlessgriffin

12 is competent. It'll fail if they get overly complicated in the directions.

It'll fail just under 40% of the time just being rolled, without penalties for low Loyalty or morale shattering events (like surprise attacks, half the Hirelings already being dead, etc).

Tactics sounds like pretty much RAW. Anyway, that's the way I've always viewed it.

I added more to what Tactics does (trying different things over time), and give Strategy actual uses (mostly in the planning stage) as I've found if you hew to what little they do "by RAW" eventually Players realize just ignoring those skills and pumping the primary "dungeon delving skills" is more valuable.

It's the 'ye olde Thief' problem, the problem being Thief as a profession template is terrible and superfluous. So you either need to build your adventures around making the Thief uniquely useful* (mildly difficult and annoying) or accept that no one will want to play a Thief* (which is what I've done, and then toss int he stuff I normally would and let the PCs suffer for not having a Thief).


* The parallel here being either you need to make non-combat skills more broadly useful (more applications and more opportunities to use them) or accept that the PCs will prefer minor inconveniences for not having them as they focus more solely on the core delving skills for their professions.

Yes, to START.

I've found it isn't just "to start'. If you run DFRPG "as it's meant", or even close to it, you'll find that combat and magic skills (and to a slightly lesser extent the physical delving skills) are the primary skills PCs will care about.

The "succeed or die" skills.

They will absolutely preference those skills as failing those skills means death, where failing a Social Skill rarely does.

So, as I've found, if you want them to respect Social Skills the stakes need to be a bit higher... which means if they're failing them all the time (12s really do suck), Players will feel as though they're being punished for making Characters by the book. It's something to think about and why I give out slightly more points so PCs can get to 13-14s in a few social and other Background skills. Because while those skills are rarely "succeed or die" skills, they come close.

Also it is good that Bard actually has SOMETHING to be good at.

They aren't just 'good' at Social. They will wreck your attempt to make Social Skills broadly useful if there is a Bard in the party. They are so much better... it's like if you have a Knight and a party full of Wizards in a No Mana Zone. The Knight will rock, the Wizards will feel useless. The Bard is so good at social they will dominate any normal social encounter or test you face the group with, unless it's very penalized in which case no one but the Bard will even have a shot.

Bards completely wreck normal Social party dynamics.

Okay, at least that's been my experiences with Players making Very Handsome, very Charismatic Bards. If they go the high Bard Song, Luck, or Wealth route, your experience will likely differ.

And if a Player tries to get you to allow them to play a Bard of the Nymph race from DF 3 The Next Level, just say no.

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Diplomacy is different from other influence rolls (Exploits pg 10) in that "Exception: If you used Diplomacy, the GM will also make a regular reaction roll and use the better of the two reactions."

Huh. I'm so used to regular GURPS I didn't notice the shift to not making Reaction Rolls first, Influence rolls second. Hah, I still do it the old way, but yeah, I can see this being a strong shift to reduce rolls and preference PC skills...

Anyway, in this case if the PC has both Leadership and Born War Leader I treat Leadership the way Diplomacy works This makes the Knight and Holy Warrior able to give commands as well as the Wizard...

(Leadership is an IQ skill, Wizards tend to easily have very good Social Skills just by putting a point or two into those skills and thus are better than other templates that have to put in twice or more points to be as good. Wizards tend to be the biggest problems in my games with the "stepping on other's roles", both with Social skills and helping make Thief completely unnecessary.)

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

It'll fail just under 40% of the time just being rolled, without penalties for low Loyalty or morale shattering events (like surprise attacks, half the Hirelings already being dead, etc).

Nitpick: 12 or lower fails only 25% of the time, not 40%. 12 is actually pretty good IMO, though of course it depends on what's at stake.

Originally Posted by mburr0003

(Leadership is an IQ skill, Wizards tend to easily have very good Social Skills just by putting a point or two into those skills and thus are better than other templates that have to put in twice or more points to be as good. Wizards tend to be the biggest problems in my games with the "stepping on other's roles", both with Social skills and helping make Thief completely unnecessary.)

Bards, clerics, and druids are also good at rendering thieves unnecessary. In the case of leadership or tactics skill I'd recommend giving that responsibility to the cleric, both because it's thematic and because clerics need something to do while they're hiding safely in the rear. Playing general is as good an option as any.

"Sons of Mother Church, smite now the orcish hordes! For your wives and children's sake, stand fast, and may the One Above All guide your aim!"

[restlessgriffin]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Bards, clerics, and druids are also good at rendering thieves unnecessary. In the case of leadership or tactics skill I'd recommend giving that responsibility to the cleric, both because it's thematic and because clerics need something to do while they're hiding safely in the rear. Playing general is as good an option as any.

Why? Thieves mostly detect traps and disarm them, pick locks and open doors, sneak past sentries and backstab enemies. How do Bards, Clerics, and Druids replace these functions typically performed by thieves.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by restlessgriffin

Why? Thieves mostly detect traps and disarm them, pick locks and open doors, sneak past sentries and backstab enemies. How do Bards, Clerics, and Druids replace these functions typically performed by thieves.

Trap detection is based on Per, so e.g. a druid with one Quirk point in Traps plus a nice Keen (Sight) +5 spell from a bard or wizard detects at Traps-18, better than a Thief normally does (Per 14 +1 = Traps-15). Moreover the druid can do it all REMOTELY via Rider Within on a created animal or one controlled via Control Animal.

Trap-disarming (DX-based) and trap-creating (IQ-based) tend to be less important (e.g. avoid the trap or have a monkey or a wizard with Apportation set it off), but druids/bards/clerics/wizards are all good at trap creation anyway due to high IQ. Lockpicking and trap disarming can go on any high-DX character (Swashbucklers excel at important lockpicking due to Luck).

Sneaking past sentries: druids are best (Create Animal + Rider Within), bards are good (Stealth + Hush spell, or just Loyalty), clerics are not good. (Wizards with Wizard Eye or illusions with Initiative are even better than druids unless it's necessary to physically interact, e.g. open doors.)

Backstabbing enemies is just a subset of killing enemies, which almost anyone can do. E.g. an Elven Bard with Resist Sound on friendlies throws a Concussion and then uses Song of Humiliation to stun whoever made their HT-3 roll; or a druid's conjured wolves rip an enemy to shreds with All Out Attack (double); or a cleric invests enough in Innate Attack to reliably hit enemies in the face/skull with 2d6 Sun Bolt for 1 FP. And it's not like they can't do these things from a backstab--the elven bard in particular can succeed on a backstab roll most of the time, but maybe won't want to because backstabbing puts you in the middle of the enemies and leaves you vulnerable to being surrounded. But backstabbing isn't even restricted to thieves.

Anyway, in the context of this thread, Leadership and clerics is a good fit. (Ditto Tactics.)