Trust or Charm when MA/PB is under 16

[cbrekkas]

Is it possible for a player to roll Trust or Charm even if their MA/PB is not on the chart? One of my players come from dnd and enjoys making diplomacy checks often to avoid combat, etc. This is his first time playing Palladium. His character's MA/PB are not on the chart. I was wondering if there was even a small chance of possibility or is it "sorry it's impossible for you to Trust/Intimidate/Charm/Impress anyone". If so, I think that's stupid. I've been running Palladium games for decades and he's the first player that asked me. Before him I never thought of it.

Also is there a roll to see if an npc is lying to a character? He was also the first player to ask me that. I can't find that in the rules.

Thanks

[Father Goose]

Is it possible for a player to roll Trust or Charm even if their MA/PB is not on the chart? One of my players come from dnd and enjoys making diplomacy checks often to avoid combat, etc. This is his first time playing Palladium. His character's MA/PB are not on the chart. I was wondering if there was even a small chance of possibility or is it "sorry it's impossible for you to Trust/Intimidate/Charm/Impress anyone". If so, I think that's stupid. I've been running Palladium games for decades and he's the first player that asked me. Before him I never thought of it.

Also is there a roll to see if an npc is lying to a character? He was also the first player to ask me that. I can't find that in the rules.

Thanks

It has always been my understanding that the Trust/Intimate was meant to reflect your character having a natural charisma that makes you believable regardless of what you say, though without a guarantee (hence the percentage roll). Charm/Impress is supposed to reflect our natural inclination to favor attractive people in the same way.
These are inherently to the individual, not cultivated skills. On the skill side are Public Speaking and Seduction (maybe more but I don't have books with me atm) that reflect things you have learned to do with practice.
With that in mind, no, you cannot make checks against inherent ability if you do not possess it. You must instead learn a skill to compensate.

As for detecting lies with skills, I'm not sure. There probably is, but it's not coming immediately to mind.

I hope this helps.

[cbrekkas]

Thanks.

[Nekira Sudacne]

The Interrogation skill is the one that detecting a lie or deception falls under.

[Father Goose]

The Interrogation skill is the one that detecting a lie or deception falls under.

Thanks, I knew there was one but I was drawing a blank.

[cbrekkas]

Thanks that helps

[Jack Burton]

The interrogation skill is the one that detecting a lie or deception falls under.

I disagree with that. Interrogation is an art form performed under controlled conditions and consists of the interrogator using a combination of empathy, persuasion, pressure, bluffing and knowing the correct questions to ask in order to get information or a confession out of someone. The subject's answers and body language are analyzed by the interrogator and are used to fine tune the interrogation more and more until the subject breaks and starts to talk. Yes, an interrogator can use this skill to help determine if a subject is lying, but it doesn't mean he or she is a human lie detector just by hearing the words that come out of someone's mouth. There's way more to it than that and I think by reading the description of the skill in its entirety, you can see that. Using Interrogation to simply detect deception under circumstances not amounting to an actual interrogation isn't a good application of that skill. Just my 2 cents and as always, it's the GM's ultimate call.

[Nekira Sudacne]

The interrogation skill is the one that detecting a lie or deception falls under.

I disagree with that. Interrogation is an art form performed under controlled conditions and consists of the interrogator using a combination of empathy, persuasion, pressure, bluffing and knowing the correct questions to ask in order to get information or a confession out of someone. The subject's answers and body language are analyzed by the interrogator and are used to fine tune the interrogation more and more until the subject breaks and starts to talk. Yes, an interrogator can use this skill to help determine if a subject is lying, but it doesn't mean he or she is a human lie detector just by hearing the words that come out of someone's mouth. There's way more to it than that and I think by reading the description of the skill in its entirety, you can see that. Using Interrogation to simply detect deception under circumstances not amounting to an actual interrogation isn't a good application of that skill. Just my 2 cents and as always, it's the GM's ultimate call.

I didn't say it could be used automatically in any situation. I only said that the rules say it can detect lies. the OP simply asked what the skill was and didn't specify any particular circumstance, so I just gave the skill on hand. The fact the GM has to determine if the skill is applicable in any given situation was because that's the natural default and so didn't need to actually be said.

[ShadowLogan]

Is it possible for a player to roll Trust or Charm even if their MA/PB is not on the chart? One of my players come from dnd and enjoys making diplomacy checks often to avoid combat, etc. This is his first time playing Palladium. His character's MA/PB are not on the chart. I was wondering if there was even a small chance of possibility or is it "sorry it's impossible for you to Trust/Intimidate/Charm/Impress anyone". If so, I think that's stupid. I've been running Palladium games for decades and he's the first player that asked me. Before him I never thought of it.

Also is there a roll to see if an npc is lying to a character? He was also the first player to ask me that. I can't find that in the rules.

Thanks

No, but there are several ways to approach it. In fact I'm not even sure how the T/I and C/I attribute "skills" are supposed to work (I think the closest I've seen is something in Ninja's and Super Spies in regard to a power, but it might be in conjunction with that power).

Here are a few suggestions in making T/I and C/I work for below 16 attribute scores:
A. Reduce the 16 score by 5% (this is the rate it increases most often, maybe go with more than 1 increment though) and use that as a fixed base
B. Extrapolate the percentage backward for a given attribute score (it is possible to reduce the 16-30 range attribute bonuses down to a a formula for each, especially when you graph it out).

For avoiding combat/etc, have them "ROLE PLAY" the situation out instead of "ROLL PLAY".

Lie detection is part of Interrogation skill, but could also be done with some other skills (ex. if the target is making false statements about what would need to be done to fix the car, someone with auto-mechanics could catch them in the lie). For situations that wouldn't be covered by a skill (ex. automechanics) like personal information ("no I don't know Jane") you'd have to default to the Interrogation skill or maybe a perception check (if using perception)

[cbrekkas]

Thanks

[Braden Campbell]

Since an MA of 16 only gives a person a 40% chance of causing trust/intimidation, a base percentage below that might be acceptable for "average Joes."

You could either assign everyone a base 35% shot at puling it off... or continue the scale downwards by 5% until you hit a stat of 9 (5%) for the absolute average human being, and say that, below that, you haven't got a shot.

[Father Goose]

Since an MA of 16 only gives a person a 40% chance of causing trust/intimidation, a base percentage below that might be acceptable for "average Joes."

You could either assign everyone a base 35% shot at puling it off... or continue the scale downwards by 5% until you hit a stat of 9 (5%) for the absolute average human being, and say that, below that, you haven't got a shot.

The problem with using a value for attributes below 16 is that it a) goes against the purpose (as I noted in my first post), and b) skews the bonuses for races like the Kraks. WB 30, p110 addresses a bonus that Kraks get for being naturally charming and allows them to have a base value chance for Trust, even without an MA of 16, plus giving a bonus if they have a 16 or higher. This makes it pretty clear to me that you are not intended to have a base value chance when your attribute is below 16, and backs up my initial explanation for the mechanics.
I understand wanting to be able to make those checks regardless of your attributes, but if you consider reality, people are shallow and do not respond favorably to people they deem ugly or of poor personality. Instead of trying to change the rules to allow you to do something your character is not supposed to do, try roleplaying your attributes more. If you have a lower MA, make your character lacking in his interpersonal qualities. Make him a heavy sweater, a mouth breather, a stutterer, a guy who makes inappropriate jokes, or whatever you want to help explain why people don't take him as seriously. Usually, your rolls are not so fantastic that you can be good at everything. Sometimes, you have to choose between being the bruiser and being the face.
That said, Rule 0 is your fix for anything you don't like. It allows you to ignore rules, change rules, add rules, or do anything else you like in your own game.

[Braden Campbell]

":people are shallow and do not respond favorably to people they deem ugly or of poor personality."

Donald Trump got elected President. He clearly rolled 01% while having attributes of less than 16.

[Jack Burton]

":people are shallow and do not respond favorably to people they deem ugly or of poor personality."

Donald Trump got elected President. He clearly rolled 01% while having attributes of less than 16.

For the love of everything that's holy, can we PLEASE not turn this forum into anything remotely resembling something political or use it to take shots at anyone on either side of the spectrum? Whether it's meant as a "Funny-Ha-Ha" or not, it's bound to start a whole "thing." I enjoy RPGs because they're an imaginative and healthy escape from the toxicity of what will result from posts like above.... which is why I don't go on RPG.net anymore. I just don't want to hear it and I suspect I'm not the only one who feels that way.

[Father Goose]

":people are shallow and do not respond favorably to people they deem ugly or of poor personality."

Donald Trump got elected President. He clearly rolled 01% while having attributes of less than 16.

This is a perfect example of the unrealistic aspect of a mechanic that is trying to simulate something realistic. That is, what one person finds charming, good looking, etc. is not automatically the same as what a different person finds charming, good looking, etc.
You clearly don't find Donald Trump to be a person with a 16 or better on MA/PB, but obviously others do. In the real world it is very subjective, yet our reaction remains the same. Those we find to be beautiful or possessed of good social skills are given preferential treatment over those we find ugly or of poor social skill. The game attempts to reflect this in the MA/PB rules, even though it does not take into account the subjective nature of those base attributes.
I try to understand what a mechanic was attempting to convey (even if it is lacking) in order to understand its importance. From there, I find it much easier to decide what to change, what to extrapolate, and what to leave alone, without undermining the tone of the setting or the feel of the rules. I don't always get it right, which is why I am on this forum, but that is always my goal.

[Braden Campbell]

Man, oh man... it was just a joke guys. I’m not on any side of the spectrum. I’m not even an American.

Just forget it...