Diplomacy should be a combat skill

[mondblut]

your character, a single LV1 bard

What?

versus three LV3 thugs guarding the bridge that you need to pass through.

That means "go back and grind some". Like a man. Also, "don't play poofter classes".

The problem, I imagine, is the widespread dogma that combat has to end with a single victory state, that is, with all of your opponents lying dead in a puddle of blood. Now, you could say that all of this is already solved by the dialogue trees, but my counter to that would be that a) dialogue trees are not gameplay, they're boring to "play"; and b) you cannot replicate them cheaply, each dialogue has to be uniquely written by the writers and you cannot hope to make every thug have a fully-fledged one.

You can see the example of this in Fate: Gates of Dawn, where you have 100500 various options to choose from in every encounter that does not turn into combat at once. Tragic fact: it's even more boring than dialog trees and it doesn't really work. There are only 3 universal end states: either you succeed and the encounter is gone, or you fail and get attacked, or you semi-fail and go back to square one.

I'd rather deal with encounters via combat than with a magic button that sometimes works. At least combat gives you xp. The "Remove encounter...maybe" button is not gameplay.

 

[TrueNeutralPaladin]

I like the concept, and it reminds me of something that I did with a character in Morrowind: I used Calm spells to drop opponents out of combat, then initiated dialogue and used persuasion options to increase their disposition to 100, making them friendly.

Some NPCs are scripted to be hostile even at high disposition (for example, Red Livia), but many dungeons can be cleared without killing any NPCs.

My character was a vampire, and I was using the Vampire Embrace mod, so naturally I later transformed many of those pacified NPCs into minions.

It was fun, but the persuasion system in Morrowind is rather janky, so it was more-or-less a matter of tolerating those mechanics because an interesting and desirable outcome could be achieved.

I don't know what a well-developed "diplomacy during combat" system would entail, but it's an interesting idea.

 

[CryptRat]

I like charm, fear and other confusion effects during battles, so it's likely I would use one such character with the "trashtalker" class in my party.

 

[Sykar]

Greatest dialogue combat of all time:

 

[thesheeep]

Capable DMs allow the use of diplomacy skills in combat, when it makes sense.
E.g. after putting up a good fight, trying to talk your way out of a situation by pointing out it would only mean losses for the enemy, etc.

But in order to put something like that in a video game, it has to be systemic somehow. AI would need to be able to analyze its situation in combat, future chances, etc. - all the things a real person would.
That's pretty hard to pull off in anything but the most simple manner.
And then it would also have to be somewhat balanced so you can't just abuse the hell out of it and suddenly your Bard wins all your combat encounters for you.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[DJOGamer PT]

GMTK has a cool video on how to make dialogue mechanics more involded:

 

[V_K]

But in order to put something like that in a video game, it has to be systemic somehow. AI would need to be able to analyze its situation in combat, future chances, etc. - all the things a real person would.
That's pretty hard to pull off in anything but the most simple manner.

I mean, we're talking about an RPG, any simulation could be abstracted to a few stats, status effects and mechanics.

And then it would also have to be somewhat balanced so you can't just abuse the hell out of it and suddenly your Bard wins all your combat encounters for you.

Or it could lead to more complexity, making defensive abilities more valuable as you try to keep your bard alive long enough to win the encounter, and at the same time not aggravate the enemies too much thus ruining all his work.

 

[thesheeep]

Or it could lead to more complexity, making defensive abilities more valuable as you try to keep your bard alive long enough to win the encounter, and at the same time not aggravate the enemies too much thus ruining all his work.

Keeping the bard alive as a core gameplay element could very well make a game of its own

 

[Grampy_Bone]

This is an old debate.

Fail at diplomacy -> You fight

Fail at fighting -> You die

Ergo, fighting should be tougher and more rewarding than diplomacy. Nothing more disappointing than to be ready for combat only to have the enemy flop over limp and flaccid without resistance because you passed a skill check.

 

[TrueNeutralPaladin]

Nothing more incline than to be ready for combat only to have the enemy flop over face-down and ass-up without resistance because you passed a skill check.

Fixed.

Spoiler

But seriously, why would you choose the diplomatic option if you want to fight?

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[V_K]

This is an old debate.

Fail at diplomacy -> You fight

Fail at fighting -> You die

Ergo, fighting should be tougher and more rewarding than diplomacy. Nothing more disappointing than to be ready for combat only to have the enemy flop over limp and flaccid without resistance because you passed a skill check.

What does this have to do with anything?

 

[Jvegi]

I mean, let's be real: dialog skills are boring.

They are there for worldbuilding and roleplaying reasons. They are important but not as important as combat, and they will never be.

Arcanum.

 

[Falksi]

What I'm thinking of is that it'd be quite easy to give the character a handful of spell-like diplomatic abilities to use on sentient enemies. Something like intimidating them into fleeing, taunting them into losing concentration, manipulating them to turn on each other, persuading to look the other way

I like these ideas. Especially useful for the usually oh so limp Bard.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

The problem with dialogue skill is not that they are useless and need more utility. These are usually hands-down the best skills in the game. Often unlocking unique content that cannot be accessed otherwise or compensated in any way.
The problem with them is that they are boring as shit to use. It's just: look at the dialogue option that has skill next to it and click it. If it doesn't work just look for the longest dialogue line, it's probably the best option. It's just button-awesome, before button-awesome was a thing.
Making dialogue skills useful in combat does nothing to make them more interesting, it just makes them more attractive to players since they now get button-awesome and combat utility.
Some time ago I've played an interesting tactical RPG: Super Robot Wars III. In the first mission you are fighting a bunch of mooks along with famous original Gundam antagonist Char. If you manage to get him that's it, he's dead. However if you manage to get Amuro Ray right next to him you get a "talk command" which makes Char retreat. In a future combat encounter you can recruit him if you talked him down earlier.
So here's my solution: move the dialogue checks from the safety of a town directly into combat encounters. You can waste your turn to initiate a dialogue in which you can make a skill-check. If you succeed you get a tick and combat continues as usual, if you get enough ticks, you get an some beneficial effect. Either the enemy sees that he's wrong and stops fighting, or you goat someone into saying more than he should, or you intimidate an enemy to switch sides during the encounter.

 

[Sykar]

Here we have Hessi James talking someone to death!

 

[AdolfSatan]

Guys, guys, stop fighting. The folks at whalenought have already devised a working mechanic to this effect. Just wait for Copper Dreams to be released and you'll see, it's coming anytime soon.

Spoiler

The only instance in which I can see this kinda shit working is in a single player hobo-simulator like NEOscav, where the stakes are high enough that negotiating or talking your way out of a fight might be preferable to losing everything.

 

[Butter]

Real world diplomacy isn't a viable alternative to fighting. It's a tool that only works if you're also capable of fighting. It would be funny if the speech skill constantly gave you shitty outcomes if you didn't have the muscle to demand anything better. Essentially it would be the surrender skill.

 

[Harthwain]

Behold!

 

[Sweeper]

Talking never solved anyone's problems.

 

[infidel]

versus three LV3 thugs guarding the bridge that you need to pass through.

That means "go back and grind some". Like a man. Also, "don't play poofter classes".

Somehow I knew you were going to say this. You can also imagine that you're on a main quest time limit, to cut off the grind option. My point was mainly that you can design a game around a player character that is always at a disadvantage in straight combat without using the talker abilities.

You can see the example of this in Fate: Gates of Dawn, where you have 100500 various options to choose from in every encounter that does not turn into combat at once. Tragic fact: it's even more boring than dialog trees and it doesn't really work. There are only 3 universal end states: either you succeed and the encounter is gone, or you fail and get attacked, or you semi-fail and go back to square one.

I'd rather deal with encounters via combat than with a magic button that sometimes works. At least combat gives you xp. The "Remove encounter...maybe" button is not gameplay.

That's just one example of bad and simplistic implementation. I bet you can give me a ton of examples of games with bad combat, too. The obvious problem here is that it's a single button skill check. For it to be interesting it needs skills, active/passive abilities and status effects. Here's a random list of what I had in mind (all mechanics and numbers are just to illustrate the point).

Scoundrel Skill Abilities:

Call for help - PbAoE, 10 meters, 6 energy. Tricks opponents into thinking you have friends coming. On success stuns every opponent in range for 2 turns, after which they receive "Resistance to BS" effect.

Beg for mercy - PbAoE, 5 meters, 4 energy. Relaxes your opponents thinking they won opening them for the backstabbing attacks. On success all opponents in range receive an "Open for attack" effect (-75% armor rating on next attack).

Shrivel their loins - Single target, 5 meters, 2 energy. Scares your opponent into thinking you've cursed them. On success disarms opponent for 1 turn while he checks, after which they receive "Resistance to BS" effect.

He did it! - Single target, melee range, 2 energy. Makes your opponent think he was attacked by one of his allies. On success he receives a "He did it!" effect for 2 turns and attacks a new target while it lasts.

 

[Starwars]

Skyrim was also *clearly* ahead of the curve here with its Shouts.

I will never forget that loading screen explaining that, yes, Shouting is just a deadly verbal debate.

Truly the most amazing example of combat and dialogue mixed together!

 

[Incendax]

Combat Skills?

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Scoundrel Skill Abilities:

Call for help - PbAoE, 10 meters, 6 energy. Tricks opponents into thinking you have friends coming. On success stuns every opponent in range for 2 turns, after which they receive "Resistance to BS" effect.

Beg for mercy - PbAoE, 5 meters, 4 energy. Relaxes your opponents thinking they won opening them for the backstabbing attacks. On success all opponents in range receive an "Open for attack" effect (-75% armor rating on next attack).

Shrivel their loins - Single target, 5 meters, 2 energy. Scares your opponent into thinking you've cursed them. On success disarms opponent for 1 turn while he checks, after which they receive "Resistance to BS" effect.

He did it! - Single target, melee range, 2 energy. Makes your opponent think he was attacked by one of his allies. On success he receives a "He did it!" effect for 2 turns and attacks a new target while it lasts.

Those skills kinda make the player look like a huge bitch.