Influence Checks

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Note, however, that a bonus to a skill and a bonus to the use of that skill as an Influnce roll are two different things. A skill bonus is wider and more useful than a bonus that applies only to Influence rolls with a certain skill.

Do you honestly believe that Appearance does not grant a personal reaction modifier?

Look at the description of Voice. It says explicitly that it gives +2 to any reaction roll made by someone who can hear your voice. If you are going to say that a bonus to reaction rolls automatically transfers to Influence rolls, that would entail that Voice gives +2 to Intimidation, Savoir-Faire, and Streetwise.

Those skills are not listed as skills that get bonuses from Voice, either in the description of Voice or in the descriptions of the respective skills. But it also does not say that in any of those places that they don't get such bonuses when you make Influence rolls based on them.

Do you believe that Voice gives you +2 to attempts to influence people with Intimidation, for example? Or do you believe that the nonlisting of Voice as a modifier to Intimidation, when it is listed as a modifier to other Influence skills, means that you don't get a bonus to such attempts, and that the general statement about reaction modifiers transferring over is suspended by that silence?

[MrTim]

Originally Posted by Jarreth

Confused by the "All your personal reaction modifiers" apply.

According to Campaigns: the influence skills are: Diplomacy, Fast-Talk, Intimidation, Savoir-Faire, Sex Appeal, and Streetwise.

Note that Influence skills can be used for things besides Influence rolls, and Influence rolls can be rolled against skills that are not normally Influence skills.

The Voice advantage states: "This gives you +2 with the following skills:
Diplomacy, Fast-Talk, Mimicry, Performance, Politics, Public Speaking, Sex Appeal, and Singing. You also get +2 on any reaction roll made by someone who can hear your voice.

Doesn't logic dictate that since the skills modified by Voice are spelled out that the base rule of "All your personal reaction modifiers" do not apply here? So Voice does not grant to Intimidation, Savoir-Faire, and Streetwise.

Not necessarily. It certainly doesn't add to Intimidation, Savoir-Faire, and Streetwise when they're not being used as Influence skills.

The point of contention is whether the fact that they're not mentioned is inclusive or exclusive. My inclination is to say that since the Voice description doesn't explicitly say the modifier doesn't apply to Influence rolls, it applies to Influence rolls. It makes logical sense too; an influential voice is still influential when it's being used to scare you, convince you to operate within societal norms, or make a shady deal with you.

If ALL personal reaction modifiers applied there would be no reason to write anything else but that under the influence skills descriptions.

Well, there's certainly the case of Intimidation, where the Appearance modifiers would apply negatively. That applies to Intimidation rolls to Influence as well as other Intimidation rolls.

EG: Voice "This gives you +2 with the following skills:
Mimicry, Performance, Politics, Public Speaking, and Singing. You also get +2 on any reaction roll made by someone who can hear your voice, as well as all influence rolls. Or something to that effect.

But that means that it doesn't apply to Diplomacy, Fast Talk, and Sex Appeal rolls that aren't Influence rolls. I've always interpreted Voice as applying to all uses of those skills, as long as the character can be heard.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Look at the description of Voice. It says explicitly that it gives +2 to any reaction roll made by someone who can hear your voice. If you are going to say that a bonus to reaction rolls automatically transfers to Influence rolls, that would entail that Voice gives +2 to Intimidation, Savoir-Faire, and Streetwise.

Not at all. Voice does not give a general skill bonus to these three skills. Voice does give a bonus to the use of these skills for Influence rolls as long as the GM doesn't feel that it is inappropriate for the specific case. The two are not equivalent.

Originally Posted by whswhs

Do you believe that Voice gives you +2 to attempts to influence people with Intimidation, for example? Or do you believe that the nonlisting of Voice as a modifier to Intimidation, when it is listed as a modifier to other Influence skills, means that you don't get a bonus to such attempts, and that the general statement about reaction modifiers transferring over is suspended by that silence?

I believe that I would not apply any bonus for Voice to Intimidation attempts that do not incorporate a significant verbal component, e.g. uses of Fearsome Stare, Follow-Through, You're Next!, Shticks like Chiburi, Power Gaze or any other Intimidation attempt where there is little or no dialogue involved. This would be an example of the GM deciding that a given personal reaction modifier was inappropriate for a certain Influence roll.

I would apply the reaction bonus for Voice to Intimidation attempts where the character describes, in great detail, exactly why it would be a very bad idea to make him angry. For examples of Voice serving to make Intimidation attempts more compelling and effective, see James Earl Jones as Darth Vader or Thulsa Doom, or for that matter any character portrayed by James Spader, such as Alan Shore in Boston Legal or 'Red' Reddington in Blacklist. When they deliver monologues designed to terrify their foes into compliance, their mellifluous, fascinating, compelling voices make their calmly delivered threats much more memorable, arresting, and, in my opinion, more likely to be effective.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Icelander

I would apply the reaction bonus for Voice to Intimidation attempts where the character describes, in great detail, exactly why it would be a very bad idea to make him angry. For examples of Voice serving to make Intimidation attempts more compelling and effective, see James Earl Jones as Darth Vader or Thulsa Doom, or for that matter any character portrayed by James Spader, such as Alan Shore in Boston Legal or 'Red' Reddington in Blacklist. When they deliver monologues designed to terrify their foes into compliance, their mellifluous, fascinating, compelling voices make their calmly delivered threats much more memorable, arresting, and, in my opinion, more likely to be effective.

If the description is "in great detail" then I'd call that a special case, and of course the GM can decide to grant a bonus in a special case. It doesn't sound as if you are talking about, for example, a scene where the sheriff levels his gun at the ooutlaw and says, "Put your hands up!"—the intimidating effect in that case seems to come from the physical threat, not from the brief order being delivered in a clear, resonant voice.

But in any case, it seems we have different ways of interpreting the rules.

Let's go back to Appearance. I think we agree, on one hand, that if we are talking about a standard reaction roll, such as "you walk into the party; what kind of impression do you make?" or "is there a room at the inn?", Appearance is relevant; on the other, if you are making a standard skill roll, Appearance may not be relevant. It's tricky thinking of uses of some Influence skills other than Influence rolls, but one clear case is Streetwise; I think we agree that being incredibly good looking will not help you roll to spot that the person approaching you in the crowd is a pickpocket, and being hideous won't make it harder, right?

So when we're talking about Influence rolls, I think there are four different ways to read the RAW:

Attractive or better appearance gives you bonuses to all Influence rolls, and Unattractive or worse gives you penalties. (These are Influence rolls, which are treated as reaction rolls, and appearance modifies reaction rolls.)

Attractive or better appearance gives you bonuses to Influence rolls based on Sex Appeal; Unattractive or worse gives you doubled penalties; and really negative appearance gives you bonuses to Intimidation. There are no other effectts of appearance on Influence rolls. (You're using Influence skills in these rolls, and the modifiers for skill rolls apply, and supersede the modifiers for reaction rolls.)

Modifiers are as stated just above for Sex Appeal and Intimidation; for other Influence skills, the modifiers for Influence rolls are the same as the modifiers for standard reaction rolls. (You apply the special modifiers ONLY to Influence rolls based on Influence skills that get special bonuses or penalties; if there are no such special bonuses or penalties, you apply the standard reaction roll modifiers instead.)

You apply both sets of modifiers. If you're Beautiful, your Sex Appeal roll gets +2/+8 from the skill modifier and +2/+8 from the reaction roll modifier. If you're Ugly, it gets -4 and -2. If you're Hideous, your Intimidation roll gets +2 from the skill modifier and -4 from the reaction roll modifier. (Both rules are stated, after all. I mention this only for completeness, as I don't think for a moment that you would advocate it.)

Okay. To start with, there's a general rule that you don't take modifiers from BOTH the reaction roll modifier and the skill modifier; for example, if you have Diplomacy-18 AND Voice, you can say "Voice gives me +2 to reaction rolls" OR "Voice raises my Diplomacy to 20, and that gives me +2 to reaction rolls," but you can't take both bonuses and get +4. That rules out my fourth option.

If you always apply the reaction roll modifiers to Influence rolls, then there's not much point in stating special modifiers from appearance for Sex Appeal and Intimidation; at least the great majority of their uses are to make Influence rolls, and having special modifiers that apply in rare special cases is likely to give a misleading impression. That argues against my first option.

So we have two remaining options:

Appearance gives special modifiers to Influence skills, including their use in Influence rolls: positive appearance gives bonuses to Sex Appeal, negative appearance gives doubled penalties to Sex Appeal, extreme negative appearance gives bonuses to Intimidation, and since no bonuses or penalties are stated for Diplomacy, Fast-Talk, Savoir-Faire, or Streetwise, appearance doesn't affect them.

Appearance gives special modifiers to Influence skills in general, and to Influence rolls based on Intimidation or Sex Appeal; but for Influence rolls based on the other four skills, appearance gives the standard reaction roll modifiers.

I think that the former rule makes better sense: That is, if appearance gives special modifiers for Influence rolls, rather than general reaction roll modifiers, then it should do so for rolls based on ALL Influence skills, including skills where the special modifier is +0. The latter rule seems overcomplicated and arbitrary.

I'd also mention that "applies to all Influence rolls" can't be taken literally. For example, the game mechanic for Propaganda involves an Influence roll of Propaganda skill against the average Will of the audience; but being physically unattractive does not, in general, make you unable to carry out an effective advertising campaign or religious mission.

[Icelander]

I note that the general rule for reaction modifiers and Influence rolls is that they apply unless the GM feels that they do not in the specific case or there is a note to the effect that they do not. Propaganda and psyops are specifically noted as taking reaction modifers from the character's cause, not his personal reaction modifiers. So unless the cause has Appearance, that example doesn't apply.

And the modifiers to Intimidation and Sex Appeal are specifically noted in the skill description because in both of these cases the reaction modifier that applies is not the usual reaction bonus for Appearance, but a special case for each of these skills. That explains why there is special text about Appearance in both of these skill descriptions, but all other skills that can be used for Influence rolls use the general rule on p. B359.

[Antedeguemon]

Well, the phrase "Modifiers: All your personal action modifiers (although the GM or the skill description may rule that some modifiers do not apply); any specific modifiers given in the skill description; -1 to -10 for using an inappropriate Influence skill (GM's decision)"

It really unbalances the game. It makes a character with a beautiful voice, handsome and charismatic, a person practically impossible to resist.

House Rules:
Something I do in my games is always use the difference between the social value of the PC and the opponent as a modifier.

An example is: A charismatic (+3) and Handsome (+4) character with Diplomacy 15 (normal in DF game mages). Still, he won't be able to easily influence a character with stats much higher than himself (+5) and equally handsome (+4).

So the modifiers would end up being -2 (-1 with the diplomacy bonus). Because no matter how nice and attractive he is, he's not going to be able to talk on an equal footing with someone in a very different social position than he is.

So in the case of looks, the person will resist at +4 because all their lives people have treated them better and struggled to get their attention. As well as Status. Only an excellent argument could change that.

In the case of Status, the person will have bonuses to resist because simply the whole society sees him as superior. It won't be just any person, no matter how good they are, who will change that.

That's the only way that makes sense to me.