Hello all, sorry if this has been posted before.
I find the Influence skills to be a little less clear cut than I'd like, specifically Deception. I'll try to be concise:
Charm indicates "Instances in which the desired outcome is directly opposed to the targets interests, an additional difficulty die may be added"
Coercion Indicates "attempting to persuade a character to betray his core beliefs should always add difficulty..."
I don't see similar entries under negotiate or Deception. For my game I have basically read them in. Essentially for deception, if you lie is a whopper it adds a die. Negotiation would be a really terrible deal for the target adds a die.
I've also read the (what I consider) common sense: at some point if what you are asking for, demanding, negotiating, lying about is just too far/big/silly/etc the target just doesn't agree/cave/believe/etc regardless of how good a charmer/liar/negotiator you may be.
So the process for me looks like this:
Determine what the "talker" is trying to get from the target and how they are going about it.This determines the opposed skill rolls.
Determine if the talker's request is “reasonable” – open to interpretation and discussion by the table.If “reasonable” no additional dice
If better than reasonable, reduce the dice pool by one - two
If Counter to the targets beliefs/interests increase the dice pool by one – two (with two being reserved for seriously outlandish things).
If the target would be a fool not to grant the request, no roll needed.
If the target would come to harm, or serious loss (and the target is aware of this) for taking the request and has no reasonable chance of gain automatic failure
Modifiers (Setback/Boon) based on a variety of factors other than what is being requested.
Obviously roleplaying trumps all, and you can come up with reasons for almost anything, that either reduce or eliminate the penalty for the influence check
Is this what other people are doing? Do you think the above system is too strict, too relaxed? Any thoughts at all?