I understand Performance isn’t something that’s used a whole lot in most tables, and I think that’s a disservice to the skill and to what it represents IRL. We often perceive people who manipulate and influence as “persuasive” people, but that’s probably because we see the part that’s live or at the moment of action. Hm.
I’ll try to see if I can make my idea clearer.
The way I see it, Performance is what you use to improve someone’s attitude towards you, to put on a show, or to entertain. Persuasion is what you use to direct specific courses of action or specific points of agreement. Needless to say, someone who is Friendly to you can more easily be persuaded! But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the person doing the persuasion was a skilled negotiator! Maybe they just entertained the target and made them Friendly, and then proceeded to lay out their agenda. That is, Performance is the skill you use to schmooze during the party and get the other party to like you. And you’d attempt it anyway regardless of your skillset because the odds of a catastrophic failure are low. Then you get down to brass tacks and that’s when you use Persuasion.
Persuasion is akin to Suggestion. Performance is akin to Charm Person. And of course, you could use both.
Suppose, for instance, you invite the Guildmaster over for a friendly game of poker. You’re not trying to win the game, really. You’re trying to entertain the Guildmaster so they enjoy themselves, have a good time, and become positively inclined to you. You present your real goals to them at some other future point in time. If you were trying to win, a Wis check modified by the Poker Gaming Set proficiency might be called for. But you’re not trying to win, and you’re not even pretending to be trying to win. You’re laid back, having a good time, and inviting everyone to do the same. So you’re really Performing, and it’s arguable that having both Performance and Poker proficiency would entitle you to an advantage to a Cha check.
So what’s the point of having Friendly NPCs? Lots. NPCs who are Friendly may extend aid without your asking, or with very low Persuasion and Deception DCs. They may even extend unusual aid, or aid in remarkable situations if they’re Friendly and their Ideals and Bonds could be called into the interaction. And of course, all of this is perfectly natural and normal. Very “charismatic” individuals who perform well in various situations make everyone Friendly towards them, and can sometimes inspire fanatical loyalty towards them whether or not they want that loyalty.
I do believe we often substitute Persuasion where Performance would be the more appropriate skill to call for. For instance, in the Philantrophic Enterprise Downtime Activity outline in Acquisitions Inc., the rules call for a Charisma(Persuasion) check to raise awareness of a particular problem and to inspire public action to solve the issue. But wouldn’t that be more appropriately a Performance check? You’re presenting a case and performing a character in the public eye, not engaging in intimate personal dialogue.
Recognizing Performance as an important skill will also open up more interesting skill challenges and character scenarios, as most kinds of activities meant to improve other people’s opinion of you could be argued to be some kind of Performance. It would not be unusual to have an entire round of skill challenges where the goal is various kinds of Performances. Entertain with food? Performance x cook utensils. Then a card game? Performance x gaming set. Then a dance? Performance (Dex or Cha). Such a night would be a ball!
I ran into a conflict with my player today for a similar reason.
I required a PERFORMANCE to rally their troups in chaos, while he wanted to use PERSUASION.
Context :
Nordic module, players are "Hersirs", war leaders of their raiders, defending against an assault on their village.
Due to 5 weeks awaiting the monsters of winter to fall on them, without signs in the long cold, their warriors are extremely jumpy, tense, and exploded into incoherent battle without cohesion at the sound of alarm.
The module I use suggest a DC15 Performance check to boost morale on the spur of the moment, one attempt every round, lest the enemy gain some advantages until the check suceed.
I see such a check as a rousing speech, a war cry, a "show" of strenght and confidence to shock the warriors out of their confusion
My player argue that such a check could be Persuasion, convincing the warriors to act through their leadership, that they should unite for the greater good
Do remember said check is made in the middle of fighting, screaming, steel against steel, monsters surging from the waters, fires burning to keep them at bay.
I will admit that I evolved my own ruling on a Reason/Emotion basis when deciding which of the two would be asked. Especially in short time segments (Persuasion having more room in a long talk / extending over days to change ones mind, while Performance tries to accomplish something in a single show). Do you attempt to influence the reason of your target ? Persuasion. Do you attempt to influence their emotional response ? Performance. It is not "RAW", but that's a line I've come to draw with experience.
I will not ask "who was right", I do not seek to draw such a rigid line between my players and I.
But I am curious as how the community perceive such context and what happened.
PS : None of them have Performance proficiency. I do not believe they attempted to min-max the situation though.
I understand Performance isn’t something that’s used a whole lot in most tables, and I think that’s a disservice to the skill and to what it represents IRL. We often perceive people who manipulate and influence as “persuasive” people, but that’s probably because we see the part that’s live or at the moment of action. Hm.
Honestly and graciously convince someone of something.
I don't believe that Performance is meant (or normally expected) to cover similar situations as what Persuasion (and Deception) does. Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, I don't really have a strong opinion about it. What I do think though is that this is something that should be covered beforehand so that the players know when they build their character what skills they'll need in which situations. Being told in the moment that the skill you have chosen doesn't apply to the situation you expeced it to is not a great feeling.
I ran into a conflict with my player today for a similar reason.
I required a PERFORMANCE to rally their troups in chaos, while he wanted to use PERSUASION.
Context :
Nordic module, players are "Hersirs", war leaders of their raiders, defending against an assault on their village.
Due to 5 weeks awaiting the monsters of winter to fall on them, without signs in the long cold, their warriors are extremely jumpy, tense, and exploded into incoherent battle without cohesion at the sound of alarm.
The module I use suggest a DC15 Performance check to boost morale on the spur of the moment, one attempt every round, lest the enemy gain some advantages until the check suceed.
I see such a check as a rousing speech, a war cry, a "show" of strenght and confidence to shock the warriors out of their confusion
My player argue that such a check could be Persuasion, convincing the warriors to act through their leadership, that they should unite for the greater good
Do remember said check is made in the middle of fighting, screaming, steel against steel, monsters surging from the waters, fires burning to keep them at bay.
I will admit that I evolved my own ruling on a Reason/Emotion basis when deciding which of the two would be asked. Especially in short time segments (Persuasion having more room in a long talk / extending over days to change ones mind, while Performance tries to accomplish something in a single show). Do you attempt to influence the reason of your target ? Persuasion. Do you attempt to influence their emotional response ? Performance. It is not "RAW", but that's a line I've come to draw with experience.
I will not ask "who was right", I do not seek to draw such a rigid line between my players and I.
But I am curious as how the community perceive such context and what happened.
PS : None of them have Performance proficiency. I do not believe they attempted to min-max the situation though.
Im going to agree with your player. Per the phb it specifically states that performance is “Act, tell a story, perform music, or dance.”
it states that persuasion is “Honestly and graciously convince someone of something.” The flip side to this is deception. In almost every situation that Persuasion is valid so is deception.
i don’t believe the player was trying to tell a story, dance or anything of the sort. They are trying to convince someone to act in a specific way and that is the preview of Persuasion/Deception not performance.
with that said, if the player was trying to influence someone with a story I’d allow a performance or persuasion check.
Im going to agree with your player. Per the phb it specifically states that performance is “Act, tell a story, perform music, or dance.”
it states that persuasion is “Honestly and graciously convince someone of something.” The flip side to this is deception. In almost every situation that Persuasion is valid so is deception.
i don’t believe the player was trying to tell a story, dance or anything of the sort. They are trying to convince someone to act in a specific way and that is the preview of Persuasion/Deception not performance.
I can absolutely see it being a Performance check.
Rallying the troops is, fundamentally, trying for an emotional reaction. You're not persuading them, you're inspiring them. Logic and reason don't get you very far even when you're rallying the troops before the battle, much less in the middle of it. Since there's no "leadership" skill, performance is likely the next best thing -- it's much more about conveying the impression of being a leader in the moment.
Im going to agree with your player. Per the phb it specifically states that performance is “Act, tell a story, perform music, or dance.”
it states that persuasion is “Honestly and graciously convince someone of something.” The flip side to this is deception. In almost every situation that Persuasion is valid so is deception.
i don’t believe the player was trying to tell a story, dance or anything of the sort. They are trying to convince someone to act in a specific way and that is the preview of Persuasion/Deception not performance.
I can absolutely see it being a Performance check.
Rallying the troops is, fundamentally, trying for an emotional reaction. You're not persuading them, you're inspiring them. Logic and reason don't get you very far even when you're rallying the troops before the battle, much less in the middle of it. Since there's no "leadership" skill, performance is likely the next best thing -- it's much more about conveying the impression of being a leader in the moment.
In the game Persuasion isn’t necessarily about logic and reason. Inspiring someone is persuading them.
performance has nothing to do with being a leader. It’s literally an act, a story, music and dance. What the phb says it is.
If you are giving an eloquent speech then performance would be appropriate. If you aren’t then persuasion is the better choice. But like I said I’d let the player decide because it’s really how they are going about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I understand Performance isn’t something that’s used a whole lot in most tables, and I think that’s a disservice to the skill and to what it represents IRL. We often perceive people who manipulate and influence as “persuasive” people, but that’s probably because we see the part that’s live or at the moment of action. Hm.
I’ll try to see if I can make my idea clearer.
The way I see it, Performance is what you use to improve someone’s attitude towards you, to put on a show, or to entertain. Persuasion is what you use to direct specific courses of action or specific points of agreement. Needless to say, someone who is Friendly to you can more easily be persuaded! But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the person doing the persuasion was a skilled negotiator! Maybe they just entertained the target and made them Friendly, and then proceeded to lay out their agenda. That is, Performance is the skill you use to schmooze during the party and get the other party to like you. And you’d attempt it anyway regardless of your skillset because the odds of a catastrophic failure are low. Then you get down to brass tacks and that’s when you use Persuasion.
Persuasion is akin to Suggestion. Performance is akin to Charm Person. And of course, you could use both.
Suppose, for instance, you invite the Guildmaster over for a friendly game of poker. You’re not trying to win the game, really. You’re trying to entertain the Guildmaster so they enjoy themselves, have a good time, and become positively inclined to you. You present your real goals to them at some other future point in time. If you were trying to win, a Wis check modified by the Poker Gaming Set proficiency might be called for. But you’re not trying to win, and you’re not even pretending to be trying to win. You’re laid back, having a good time, and inviting everyone to do the same. So you’re really Performing, and it’s arguable that having both Performance and Poker proficiency would entitle you to an advantage to a Cha check.
So what’s the point of having Friendly NPCs? Lots. NPCs who are Friendly may extend aid without your asking, or with very low Persuasion and Deception DCs. They may even extend unusual aid, or aid in remarkable situations if they’re Friendly and their Ideals and Bonds could be called into the interaction. And of course, all of this is perfectly natural and normal. Very “charismatic” individuals who perform well in various situations make everyone Friendly towards them, and can sometimes inspire fanatical loyalty towards them whether or not they want that loyalty.
I do believe we often substitute Persuasion where Performance would be the more appropriate skill to call for. For instance, in the Philantrophic Enterprise Downtime Activity outline in Acquisitions Inc., the rules call for a Charisma(Persuasion) check to raise awareness of a particular problem and to inspire public action to solve the issue. But wouldn’t that be more appropriately a Performance check? You’re presenting a case and performing a character in the public eye, not engaging in intimate personal dialogue.
Recognizing Performance as an important skill will also open up more interesting skill challenges and character scenarios, as most kinds of activities meant to improve other people’s opinion of you could be argued to be some kind of Performance. It would not be unusual to have an entire round of skill challenges where the goal is various kinds of Performances. Entertain with food? Performance x cook utensils. Then a card game? Performance x gaming set. Then a dance? Performance (Dex or Cha). Such a night would be a ball!
I ran into a conflict with my player today for a similar reason.
I required a PERFORMANCE to rally their troups in chaos, while he wanted to use PERSUASION.
Context :
I will admit that I evolved my own ruling on a Reason/Emotion basis when deciding which of the two would be asked. Especially in short time segments (Persuasion having more room in a long talk / extending over days to change ones mind, while Performance tries to accomplish something in a single show).
Do you attempt to influence the reason of your target ? Persuasion.
Do you attempt to influence their emotional response ? Performance.
It is not "RAW", but that's a line I've come to draw with experience.
I will not ask "who was right", I do not seek to draw such a rigid line between my players and I.
But I am curious as how the community perceive such context and what happened.
PS : None of them have Performance proficiency. I do not believe they attempted to min-max the situation though.
This is what the PHB says about the skills.
Performance
Persuasion
I don't believe that Performance is meant (or normally expected) to cover similar situations as what Persuasion (and Deception) does. Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, I don't really have a strong opinion about it. What I do think though is that this is something that should be covered beforehand so that the players know when they build their character what skills they'll need in which situations. Being told in the moment that the skill you have chosen doesn't apply to the situation you expeced it to is not a great feeling.
Im going to agree with your player. Per the phb it specifically states that performance is “Act, tell a story, perform music, or dance.”
it states that persuasion is “Honestly and graciously convince someone of something.” The flip side to this is deception. In almost every situation that Persuasion is valid so is deception.
i don’t believe the player was trying to tell a story, dance or anything of the sort. They are trying to convince someone to act in a specific way and that is the preview of Persuasion/Deception not performance.
with that said, if the player was trying to influence someone with a story I’d allow a performance or persuasion check.
I can absolutely see it being a Performance check.
Rallying the troops is, fundamentally, trying for an emotional reaction. You're not persuading them, you're inspiring them. Logic and reason don't get you very far even when you're rallying the troops before the battle, much less in the middle of it. Since there's no "leadership" skill, performance is likely the next best thing -- it's much more about conveying the impression of being a leader in the moment.
In the game Persuasion isn’t necessarily about logic and reason. Inspiring someone is persuading them.
performance has nothing to do with being a leader. It’s literally an act, a story, music and dance. What the phb says it is.
If you are giving an eloquent speech then performance would be appropriate. If you aren’t then persuasion is the better choice. But like I said I’d let the player decide because it’s really how they are going about it.