Re: Mechanical discussion

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

Mechanically, if I understand right, they're not allowed to lie. If they lose the intrigue, under those conditions, they lose the 'will' to lie. Either they were charmed into telling the truth, or intimidated into it, or convinced to do it. The decision to lie or tell the truth has already been made by the end of the intrigue. The intrigue rules just give a mechanical framework for one character to influence another one in the making of that decision.

So if Athelsten yields now, he's consenting to tell the truth, for whatever reason.

If he does not intend to tell the truth, he's still in the intrigue.

And if he resolves to lie regardless of any other input, then he's quitting the intrigue. With possible consequences to follow.

^ This

[Reader]

Mechanically, if I understand right, they're not allowed to lie. If they lose the intrigue, under those conditions, they lose the 'will' to lie. Either they were charmed into telling the truth, or intimidated into it, or convinced to do it. The decision to lie or tell the truth has already been made by the end of the intrigue. The intrigue rules just give a mechanical framework for one character to influence another one in the making of that decision.

So if Athelsten yields now, he's consenting to tell the truth, for whatever reason.

If he does not intend to tell the truth, he's still in the intrigue.

And if he resolves to lie regardless of any other input, then he's quitting the intrigue. With possible consequences to follow.

This is how it's laid out in the books and how I intend to run it.

As Athelstan points out, there are already other options, potentially leading to high drama!

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

If you yield, then you still are accepting the terms.

If you quit, that's another thing entirely.

[Athelstan]

Like I said, I have not been defeated in the intrigue, we both dealt 0 damage.

Yield in my terms offered like I said, which would have been the same thing I have already told Corrine.

[Reader]

Like I said, I have not been defeated in the intrigue, we both dealt 0 damage.

Yield in my terms offered like I said, which would have been the same thing I have already told Corrine.

I suppose mechanically this could go on a long time, but if others in the scene assist/mollify Baelon without anyone coming to Athelstan's aid, it seems like to only end in a quit, a yield or a defeat for Athelstan? If other want to join in on Baelon's side (or in a plot twist, Athelstan's) are we all okay with moving to one of those three scenarios in the interest of time?

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

Defeat or yield isn't relevant except that a yield gives you some control over what the terms are.

So I'll say again, if you yield, and it's accepted, then you're agreeing to the terms.

You're correct that Baelon can't force you to accept HIS terms at this point. But if you yield, then you're accepting whatever terms the two of you agree upon...and if those terms specify telling the truth, then you've gotta go with that.

Bearing in mind that I'm not trying to beat you over the head here. Just making sure it's clear...to some extent for my own sake, because I've struggled long and hard with the intrigue system myself.

[Athelstan]

I know I abide to what I agree, that's why I did the counter offer, after all, that part was never under discussion XD

[Baelon Drakeson]

Well, in hindsight the "
this could take a while comment"
was not as warranted than I initially thought - it was a bad roll and I have plenty of options to improve - read target for the +1D, consider for the bonus dice, even shield of reputation to lower his DR.

[Athelstan]

Well Theomore beat me to what I was thinking the Yield offers were going, but it's your turn

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

Do I need to do anything, or are you guys sorting this out?

[Athelstan]

I'm waiting, finally back on my computer, sure they are just thinking their options Baelon could always come with a surprise

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

Okedokes.

[Baelon Drakeson]

Sorry, had a meeting, then the commute home. Home now, so I should be a little more on top of the posting. Should. A little.

[Athelstan]

You are fine, I can wait, it's always fun to do this tense moments that can define a story peace or contribute to many things down the road.

[Theomore Tullison]

viewtopic.php?f=183&
p=54113#p54003

Would not Athelstan have 5 actions in the player phase?

[Reader]

http://dragonsdance.forumatic.com/viewtopic.php?f=183&
p=54113#p54003

Would not Athelstan have 5 actions in the player phase?

In this case, just run a few bow shots against the horse rather than at warfare scale. I'm at work and coming back to this in the evening.

Athelstan starting combat here would end badly for him.

[Ser Walton Dulver]

Does cohort's presence add something to intrigue? I mean increase intrigue defense, etc, because if i remember well: it can assist and on succesful roll adds half of his rolled attribute?

[Theomore Tullison]

Cohort present gives +2 to intrigue defense. And he can take actions like any regular participant (of which assist is a persuasion TN 9 for +1/2 rank), only thing of note is the informal rule that only the "
main"
participants can take influence actions.

[Theomore Tullison]

So subject reader wanted asked about here:

Interpretation of Treacherous and use in events, Reynald assumed it counted as simple intrigue and thus applied, I didn't think so, but from chapter 1, I applied it for multiple events before I realized that the quality doesn't work for everything I thought it did and swapped it out with courteous, because courteous applies to everything, with nobody taking note of it. Which kinda sets a precedence for Reynald's assumption holding true.

And famous and expertise are still better as far as dice results goes and as long as events reads persuasion/deception (any).

[Ser Raynald Dulver]

Guys, I was reading some intrigue actions when I noticed this:



I've always thought that my Disposition's bonuses and penalties were directed TO ME, not TO MY OPPONENT, but now I'm confused.

[Nathaniel Mason]

Disposition bonus/penalties are based on your disposition towards your opponent.

If YOU are affectionate toward your target, you get a +5 to Persuasion (or -2 to Deception) (regardless of how they may feel towards you.)

If YOU are Unfriendly toward your target, you get a -4 to Persuasion (or +2 to Deception.)

Mollify simply applies that bonus/penalty to your roll. So if you were Malicious to the person you were trying to Mollify, you would take a -6 penalty to this roll (your hatred of them would make it more difficult for you to reassure them.)

That is my understanding, in any case.

[Reader]

Disposition bonus/penalties are based on your disposition towards your opponent.

If YOU are affectionate toward your target, you get a +5 to Persuasion (or -2 to Deception) (regardless of how they may feel towards you.)

If YOU are Unfriendly toward your target, you get a -4 to Persuasion (or +2 to Deception.)

Mollify simply applies that bonus/penalty to your roll. So if you were Malicious to the person you were trying to Mollify, you would take a -6 penalty to this roll (your hatred of them would make it more difficult for you to reassure them.)

That is my understanding, in any case.

Nathaniel's mind and my mind are as one on this, and on the issue that Blackbuckle is a war crime! Thanks for your help.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

So the Adept Negotiator benefit relieves the possible penalty of one's disposition towards the opponent so long as the opponent is not aware of the negative disposition.

In other words, if I'm trying to Persuade a man I hate, I normally take a penalty...because I hate him. However, Adept Negotiator means that penalty is waived as long as HE does not KNOW I hate him.

Is that correct?

[Reader]

So the Adept Negotiator benefit relieves the possible penalty of one's disposition towards the opponent so long as the opponent is not aware of the negative disposition.

In other words, if I'm trying to Persuade a man I hate, I normally take a penalty...because I hate him. However, Adept Negotiator means that penalty is waived as long as HE does not KNOW I hate him.

Is that correct?

Seems to be. Rules be crazy, particularly on the disposition stuff - intimidating people you hate is harder etc? Not averse to tweaking some of it.

[Ser Raynald Dulver]

Disposition bonus/penalties are based on your disposition towards your opponent.

If YOU are affectionate toward your target, you get a +5 to Persuasion (or -2 to Deception) (regardless of how they may feel towards you.)

If YOU are Unfriendly toward your target, you get a -4 to Persuasion (or +2 to Deception.)

Mollify simply applies that bonus/penalty to your roll. So if you were Malicious to the person you were trying to Mollify, you would take a -6 penalty to this roll (your hatred of them would make it more difficult for you to reassure them.)

That is my understanding, in any case.

Yes, that's what I understand as the rule, but this session of Mollify clearly states otherwise, as it says "
YOUR test is modified by THE TARGET'S disposition, as normal"
, but I believe it was a misspell or something like that, because I don't see how what this box propose could be workable.

Anyway, thank you for helping me!

[Sponsored content]