Persuade rolls from one player to another

[HotSnow50]

@HotSnow50, It certainly sounds, with that extra information, that your players get their role-playing pleasure out of dicking each other over. Not a play style I enjoy and one I wouldn't allow in any game I ran. You're on your own for advice with this one.

sorry to have upset you

[Dunheved]

Hi.
This has been a very complicated thread to read. I think it summarises down to the following....

It seems to me that if the players agree (PCs and LM) then it's an in-house solution/style. I read that 'PC v PC' rolls are opposed by the majority of thread contributors because it is likely to lead to actual 'P v P' friction. (I'd agree with them too). [If you want that action try Diplomacy!]
HotSnow50: I think you were asking what others thought about that PvP style and most replies were opposed to using dice-rolling to resolve a table-top difference of opinion. (Mind you, no-one condemned the action - they simply disagreed with it or disliked it.)

The Shadow points for Wardens mini-thread: Again the players agreed to the decision. But I wouldn't award any negative points for preventing the innocent from a source of danger: SPOILER it wouldn't be treasure hunting to go after the Marsh Dwellers hoard - you can't beat them as there are too many of them. However, that just my POV.

For me the key thing is - if the player's agree, the game can move on.
The sub-debate about what sort of freedom of choice was very interesting though.

Best of luck & keep on playing.

[Glorelendil]

Diplomacy: best boardgame ever. Still have a strained friendship from that one.

[Corvo]

Diplomacy: best boardgame ever. Still have a strained friendship from that one.

Ah, Diplomacy.
Something so good and so bad at the same time should be born in Hell.

[Corvo]

(...)
The Shadow points for Wardens mini-thread: Again the players agreed to the decision. But I wouldn't award any negative points for preventing the innocent from a source of danger: SPOILER it wouldn't be treasure hunting to go after the Marsh Dwellers hoard - you can't beat them as there are too many of them. However, that just my POV.

For me the key thing is - if the player's agree, the game can move on.
The sub-debate about what sort of freedom of choice was very interesting though.

Best of luck & keep on playing.

Thank you
It was a tough matter to debate in a foreign language.

As many times in the Shadow point arguments, there are many perspective.
A lot of this argument revolves around the question: "is lying by omission really lying?". And in our perspective the successive question was "Does the end justifies the means?".
Our answers were: yes, it's lying, and yes, the end justifies this lying. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions, so we take a SP too...