When you make a Charisma (Persuasion) or Charisma (Deception) check, you can treat a d20 roll of 9 or lower as a 10.
I am just curious if this is before or after modifiers has been added, cause if it's before then I would definitely call it OP for a role play heavy campaign. just imaging having a +6 persuasion mod, you would literally never be able to roll below 16.
So the question is again, is it added before or after modifiers?
That's.... kinda the whole point of the Class Feature. You are incredibly talented at manipulating people and twisting interactions in your favor. You're a smooth talker, and would easily be described as a "silver tongued devil", both as a compliment and an insult.
Perhaps you need to be a little more aggressive with your Charisma DCs?
Something else to consider is the section in the DMG about attitudes towards the PCs. A sweet talking bard might be able to shift a Hostile character to being Indifferent for the moment but their attitude is going to take longer to improve permanently. In the short term, they can’t shift them from Hostile to Friendly, just Indifferent.
How do you treat natural 1 then? As 10 or as an automatic failure?
Criticals only apply for attack rolls and death saving throws. A natural 1 on anything else just means a 1. So it would be a 10.
But a lot of tables do take the combat and save mechanic and apply it to skills in general (in the fumble and critical tradition of a lot of skill check based games). So yes, doesn't matter in RAW; but to take up the OP, since it's a house rule you do what you want. That said, both this and the rogue feature I'm not sure if I'd just say automatic critical failure, but we can acknowledge even the most gifted speaker or sales person makes gaffs. What I might do is envision some unintended minor slight (like wearing the other parties least favorite color or something, and they REALLY don't like that color) forces a reroll of a straight check without the feature enabled. So 5% of the time "life happens" and the superpower doesn't work like it's supposed to. Armchair thinking out loud, haven't implemented these yet.
Why did you think reliable talent is fun? Reliable Talent has the same ability but can be applied to a wider variety of checks.
As for the auto-fail type house rules... The ability treats the roll (not the result) as a 10 if it was a 1 just like every other low roll. That prevents the aiyo-fail because the roll of 1 is not a 1 anymore.
So, I think there are several things that make it not OP.
Persuasion =/= Mind control. A good role is great at getting someone to believe what you are saying, but that doesn't mean they will go out of the realms of what they would normally do for you. No matter how persuasive you are, you are not going to be able to force someone to do anything they wouldn't be willing to do for you. Sure its fun to hear stories of how people persuaded the BBEG to stop their evil ways and become a good guy, but that isn't really how its suppose to work in game. As an extra example, If your barbarian rage rips the arm off of somebody, that person isn't going to just forgive you no matter how good your persuasion is.
NPC's have dispositions to the characters. Why would someone that you just met give you everything they own just because you asked them? They wouldn't. It doesn't matter how persuasive you are. It works the same in DND. If you have a good relationship with someone then you could persuade them to give you some of their stuff, or have them join you in your adventure. If you have a neutral relationship you might be able to persuade them to let you sleep in their home for less then it would cost to stay at an Inn. If you have a negative disposition, you might be able to persuade them to not stab you, This time. It will depend heavily on the NPC and their disposition to the PC's. In any case, there will always be things that can not be done without magic.
You should never role unless the DM asks you to. This one is simple. As a DM, there are few things more irritating then when my players tell me what they are rolling, then do it without my input. "I role a 25 to persuade this guy." Great, that's awesome. I was going to have you make a deception check because you lied to them very heavily. Role again. It is this way with every role that you want to make. It doesn't matter if its an ability check or otherwise. You DM will/should always tell you when to role and what to role.
If a single check "solves" the encounter (any encounter) then it wasn't an encounter. This goes for basically everything. If its an intimidation check to not have to fight some guys, the encounter came because of the check, the check did not beat an encounter. That being said, multiple difficult checks can and should be an encounters especially in an RP heavy game.
The DM is in full control of the outcomes of the game. If the players want to try and do something that is impossible for one reason for another, it doesn't matter if you roll a 50, said thing cant happen. I would never encourage a DM to be negativist or a shutdown with their players, but a DM is in full control of what happens. So if they don't want something to happen, it wont.
Players shouldn't be abusing their abilities. Now, what constitutes abuse will very from player to player, DM to DM, and probably from situation to situation. However, if a player is using an ability ANY ABILITY all the time to circumnavigate every and every situation, that invalidates the other players and is no fun for anybody (except for maybe that player)
Jumping into this convo way too late but wanted to add my experience:
Silver tongue was exteremly problamatic in how it basically had no chance for failure, or if you scaled things so it did, then all other party members had no chance at doing social things.
And yeah, it's not a I pursuade the bad guy to turn himself into the authorities kind of deal, but the roll was never low enough for me to be able to justify a fun negative consequence for failure.
The bard in the party elected to swap it out for something else because he thought it was too OP.
I was levelling my Bard to level 3 last night for Curse of Strahd and as soon as I read what silver tongue did for eloquence, I wanted it because I had also doubled one of my proficiencies as a result of expertise, so I now have +10 persuasion modifier as well as silver tongue...I am the perfect politician!!
Conal's post points out a lot of the ways this can still be fine. Though when I was a rogue I did find reliable talent to be potent but unfun in a way. When all but the highest DCs are an auto success it can sap some of the fun out of things. But this is also a much more narrow selection of skills to affect. WHether this is really OP or not will depend on how your DM handles things.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So directly taken from the book it says;
When you make a Charisma (Persuasion) or Charisma (Deception) check, you can treat a d20 roll of 9 or lower as a 10.
I am just curious if this is before or after modifiers has been added, cause if it's before then I would definitely call it OP for a role play heavy campaign. just imaging having a +6 persuasion mod, you would literally never be able to roll below 16.
So the question is again, is it added before or after modifiers?
It is before the modifier. It literally means the dice roll itself.
It works exactly the same way that the Rogue's Reliable Talent works.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
If that's the case, it literally destroys every single social encounter
That's.... kinda the whole point of the Class Feature. You are incredibly talented at manipulating people and twisting interactions in your favor. You're a smooth talker, and would easily be described as a "silver tongued devil", both as a compliment and an insult.
Perhaps you need to be a little more aggressive with your Charisma DCs?
Another alternative option is to be more stringent in what you ask for Charisma checks for. Successful persuasion check isn't mind control.
With expertise in these skills, a +5 to Charisma, and level 17, you can have a minimum of 27 to all these checks.
This is high level, but still allows you to be awesome at combat.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
If Persuasion or Deception can get you all the way through a social encounter, it wasn't really an encounter. It was just an extended check.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
How do you treat natural 1 then? As 10 or as an automatic failure?
Criticals only apply for attack rolls and death saving throws. A natural 1 on anything else just means a 1. So it would be a 10.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Something else to consider is the section in the DMG about attitudes towards the PCs. A sweet talking bard might be able to shift a Hostile character to being Indifferent for the moment but their attitude is going to take longer to improve permanently. In the short term, they can’t shift them from Hostile to Friendly, just Indifferent.
But a lot of tables do take the combat and save mechanic and apply it to skills in general (in the fumble and critical tradition of a lot of skill check based games). So yes, doesn't matter in RAW; but to take up the OP, since it's a house rule you do what you want. That said, both this and the rogue feature I'm not sure if I'd just say automatic critical failure, but we can acknowledge even the most gifted speaker or sales person makes gaffs. What I might do is envision some unintended minor slight (like wearing the other parties least favorite color or something, and they REALLY don't like that color) forces a reroll of a straight check without the feature enabled. So 5% of the time "life happens" and the superpower doesn't work like it's supposed to. Armchair thinking out loud, haven't implemented these yet.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Why did you think reliable talent is fun? Reliable Talent has the same ability but can be applied to a wider variety of checks.
As for the auto-fail type house rules... The ability treats the roll (not the result) as a 10 if it was a 1 just like every other low roll. That prevents the aiyo-fail because the roll of 1 is not a 1 anymore.
So, I think there are several things that make it not OP.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Jumping into this convo way too late but wanted to add my experience:
Silver tongue was exteremly problamatic in how it basically had no chance for failure, or if you scaled things so it did, then all other party members had no chance at doing social things.
And yeah, it's not a I pursuade the bad guy to turn himself into the authorities kind of deal, but the roll was never low enough for me to be able to justify a fun negative consequence for failure.
The bard in the party elected to swap it out for something else because he thought it was too OP.
I was levelling my Bard to level 3 last night for Curse of Strahd and as soon as I read what silver tongue did for eloquence, I wanted it because I had also doubled one of my proficiencies as a result of expertise, so I now have +10 persuasion modifier as well as silver tongue...I am the perfect politician!!
Conal's post points out a lot of the ways this can still be fine. Though when I was a rogue I did find reliable talent to be potent but unfun in a way. When all but the highest DCs are an auto success it can sap some of the fun out of things. But this is also a much more narrow selection of skills to affect. WHether this is really OP or not will depend on how your DM handles things.