Scripted NPC Dialogue

[Gulnyr]

This is a specific reminder of the general concept that everything your character does in-game is in-character.

The NPC dialogues, despite being scripted and in a little box, are in-character conversations - no DM required.  Don't think of it as a vending machine but as another character.  If your character interacts with a shopkeeper and, say, Intimidates him, then your character actually did that.  It isn't just a menu choice for a discount, but an actual, "You'll lower the price or else!"  (The switchblade is optional.)  Make sure your choice of dialogue fits with your character's personality and alignment.

If you are nearby and someone else chooses an option that doesn't sit well with your character, have your character say so (if your character would - not every killer out there is hero enough to stand up to the guy bullying the shopkeeper).

[lonnarin]

Hence why Kurn never uses the intimidate option in Prantz.  Baaaad idea with that angry deep dwarf guard standing right there.

[Shiokara]

Isn't this kind of a debatable point, though? What I mean is that there are plenty of dialogue options our characters are forced into when taking quests that our characters wouldn't say. This is because most of the dialogues only have the equivalent of "Yes, I will help" and "I have to go".

Sometimes it's just a question of voice. My Dwarf wouldn't say to the banker, "I would like to make a deposit" because he just doesn't talk like that. Indeed, when some NPCs are testy and rude in their quest dialogues I find myself wanting to say, "I'll help you if it gets you to shut up", but this is, unfortunately, not an option.

[Gulnyr]

The specific wording may be debatable, but the intention is not.  

In dialogues with only yes and no options, it's fair to pretend your character says whatever the dialogue choice means in his own words.  That doesn't really change what is happening.  "I'll help if you'll shut up," is essentially just "Yes, I'll help," even if it's a little rude.

In the case of vendors, there is a huge difference between paying what is asked and threatening the merchant's well-being for a discount, though, right?  That's what I'm talking about.  Sticking with that example, while a good, old-fashioned, dwarfy dwarf might say, "Lemme see yer wares, laddie," rather than, "Yes, I'd like to see what you have for sale," there's no getting around the threatening of the businessman that comes with the [Intimidate] stuck on the end of one of those otherwise identical choices.  Not debatable.

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

I have one question though...

What about the characters that aren't so much as bullying the shopkeeper, but may just BE scary for some reason...  I'm sure if Al Capone walked into your Bar back in the day, he wouldn't have to even threaten you.  You'd know that if you messed with him you're likely to die, and if you refused him business your bar was going to be riddled with Tommy Guns or blown up.  So I think for THAT particular option, it shouldn't be assumed that Tyra is pulling knives or making threats to poor shop keepers.  I imagine Tyra as just being some one that is mean and might scare someone.  (and having points in Intimidate as a Weapon Master must mean you've earned some kinda reputation as dangerous, whether you're nice or not)....

Just a thought.  I do agree with the overall points Gulnyr made.  And I will think about it a bit longer the next time I look to go shopping.

[Acacea]

I kind of hope Tyra isn't exactly Al Capone. If there is reason to believe that someone is in danger of their life for not offering a discount regardless of what is said, then it's enough for others to react to. Having points in intimidate is not about reputation, it is about using fear to coerce reactions from others, which may or may not include reputation to begin with, but will certainly effect that reputation in the eyes of witnesses according to their perception.

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

I was just using her as an example, since I tend to click that option, as well as play Tyra as (trying to be) scary...

And no Tyra is no Capone, or anyone like that.  I will think a bit more about clicking that option from now on.

[Acacea]

Or at least in what company you click it in Jennara would be considered poor company for it, as an example!

[ycleption]

There is, however, various kinds of intimidation... a LE Rofienite casually mentioning that Aniewiel's merchant license is coming up for renewal, and that without a discount said LE Rofi will exert influence to denying the renewal...

This doesn't change the original point, in that people can still overhear and object, and one should still keep in mind character/alignment/etc. However, keep in mind that the various skill choices offered are flexible: at some times, threats to economic well-being or to reputation can be more, well, intimidating than bringing out that switchblade. Likewise the other skills can be RPed out in differing ways.

[Gulnyr]

Good point about different kinds of intimidation.  

I have to question your example just a little bit, though.  Rofireinites are often involved with the upholding the law and operating the courts, but they aren't crawling all over governmental operations.  So, generally speaking, a given Rofireinite isn't going to have jack to say about merchant licensing.  A Rofireinite could submit testimony regarding some illegal activity a merchant was engaged in, but that would (ideally) be subject to a trial or hearing. There would need to be evidence. These are orderly people.  There's a system.  And if it's somewhere that Rofireinites aren't especially respected, it's just a laugh.  Besides that, I would argue a Rofireinite who abuses the law and falsely testifies is no Rofireinite at all.  Where's the honor and justice?  Also, I don't think there are any Rofireinite PCs who have the influence to make such a threat, regardless of alignment.  Maybe Jennara around Echo, but seriously, she's as intimidating as a feather pillow, and her influence there has nothing to do with being Rofireinite.

That's basically a long-winded (and very specific) way of saying the threat used has to be believable.  And, I guess, maybe a little "don't try to find ways around the rules you've set for yourself."  If Good is part of the alignment you chose for your character, you shouldn't be trying to think of ways to justify Intimidating commoners going about their honest work.  If Lawful is part of the alignment you chose for your character, honesty is probably important to him, so you shouldn't be trying to justify Bluffing commoners going about their honest work.  That sort of thing.

[ycleption]

Fair enough... I should know better than to toss out off handed examples like that :-)

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

I think it's natural for people want to explain there reasons in a defensive manner when even indirectly 'accused' of something.

[Gulnyr]

Fair enough... I should know better than to toss out off handed examples like that :-)

Nah, it wasn't that bad.  I'm just being nitpicky about Rofi themes.  It's one of those days, I guess.  I still agree with me, though.  hehe

I think it's natural for people want to explain there reasons in a defensive manner when even indirectly 'accused' of something.

Probably so, yeah.  I know you aren't saying so, but, just to be explicit, I didn't intend to accuse anyone of anything. It's a recommendation: for a better RP experience, think of the dialogues as real people rather than as words in a box on a screen.  I suspect that a lurking DM who decides to possess an NPC would do just that.  In the end, though, if playing vending machine and saving a few imaginary coins is more your style, have at.  That's a general statement; it's not aimed at Shiff or anyone else in particular.