New non-weapon proficiency--Negotiation. Would you use it?

[Lawgiver]

Would you use this proficiency in your campaigns?:

A character skilled in negotiations understands the intricacies of making 'good' deals. They have the ability to show a poker face when needed, standing firm on some points and yet they know where to give on others. They understand the ins and outs of bargaining and work out contracts to the minutiae. Such regents are rarely hood winked on any deal and generally walk away as winners from the bargaining table.

Regents with the Negotiation proficiency may receive up to a +4 success modifier when responding to the following Random Events: Feud, Diplomatic Matter, Trade Matter, and Matter of Justice, and any other item the DM agrees to. A regent may also receive a +2 to their success in performing a Diplomacy Domain Action. If both regents have the negotiation proficiency the modifiers are negated.

This is a General Proficiency available to all classes. It requires 1 Non-Weapon Prof. slot. Proficiency checks are made withan Intelligence -2.

[Riegan Swordwraith]

No offense but does not Diplomacy pretty much cover that very thing??If not maybe you can just add it to Diplomacy to get the effect you want.

[Lawgiver]

yes and no. I use it more for business deals or underhanded dealings, more like an ability for guilders. Its designed more for personal gain than peace talks. I view diplomacy as graceful and using proper ettiquette. Negotiation is taking the gloves off, I'm getting the best deal and your not type thing. There are a ton of corporate executives that can make ('force') great business deals, but couldn't draw up a diplomatic treaty to save their life.

[Riegan Swordwraith]

Okay..basically what you are talking about is intimidation.But I still feel that you can use an existing proficiency/skill(depending on whether you use 2 or 3Ed) and just modify its use for this particular case.

Personally I see Diplomacy as a mixture of being nice and being threatening.Depends on the person using the skill and what kind of dirt he has on the other...:)

[Lord Eldred]

I do not see a need for this new proficiency. The diplomacy and intimidation both cover what you are talking about Lawgiver. Diplomacy is not always playing nice.

[brownie]

There is no need for that skill as they call it in 3E. You can combine the skills of diplomacy and intimidate or any other skills. But if you come up with another skill then that is something else that you will have to waste more skill points on. It is hard enough as a thief guilder to distribute the few skill points that i get. I am not complaining because i do get 12 points per level(8+4 int mod.). Another thing you can do is if you dont like it then have them take half of total ranks or raw score after yout modifiers. Just some food for thought.

[Lord Eldred]

Well said Brownie! It is the exact point I am trying to make. Stop with the new skills so that we can help Brownie grow.

[Riegan Swordwraith]

Don't forget that in 3rd Ed most skills can be done untrained.There is also a new feat in Songs and Silence that allows one to attempt a skill untrained,even if you normally would not be able to,even class exclusive skills.Still cannot put any points into the Class Exclusive skills,but will let you ate least attempt to try it.....

[brownie]

Like you said you can try at anything. But lets be realistic anyone can try to fly by jumping off the roof but if you dont have any expierence in that how can you start to negotiate. You can try like you say you can try and roll. Even the sun shines on a dogs $%& once and a while.

[Lord Eldred]

blah ahh ah ah "even the sun shines on a dogs $%& once in awhile" Now that is good!

[Lord Shaene]

maybe you should just make this ability as an upgrade to diplomacy or intimidation, make it so you need diplomacy or intimidation as a requirement first. kind of like you have two-weapon fighting and improved two-weapon fighting?

[Lawgiver]

I reget posting it. If I could I'd retract it. Though I posted it it under the assumption of 2e and there was no such thing as intimidation... But, oh well. I concede the argument against it. In fact, I voted 'No' on the poll for my own creation!

[brownie]

Lord i like the idea as an addition needing both. I think that is a very god idea however someone that would need diplomancy like a thief has no real reason to use the intimidation. We will come up with something on here.

[Sellenus]

For d20, Diplomacy skill covers all the bases. With a synergy bonus for Bluff, Sense Motive (and I would use Initimidate as well), you gain a situational modifier for your action. If done properly, the negotiations can be rather entertaining.

[Lord Eldred]

Orginally posted by Lawgiver

I reget posting it. If I could I'd retract it. Though I posted it it under the assumption of 2e and there was no such thing as intimidation... But, oh well. I concede the argument against it.

Never in 485 posts did I think that I would see the day that Lawgiver conceded an argument! :P

[brownie]

That is nice to see. A think he is a know it all making a mistake. Just joking. Maybe you should be more careful when posting things.

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Lord Eldred
Never in 485 posts did I think that I would see the day that Lawgiver conceded an argument!

There is a first time for everything. ;-) It is but one battle... the war is far from lost!


Orginally posted by brownie
That is nice to see. A think he is a know it all making a mistake. Just joking. Maybe you should be more careful when posting things.

Maybe you should be more careful with the way you wag your tongue.

[brownie]

well lawgiver must you try and fight with me in everything you and i say.

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by brownie
well lawgiver must you try and fight with me in everything you and i say.
Only when your lack of respect and arrogance provokes me...;)

[brownie]

maybe you can not take the truth or critisism

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by brownie
maybe you can not take the truth or critisism

I am dropping the issue due to the pettiness of this dispute.