9
\$\begingroup\$

While this is a way to take away player agency, the second part of the Haughty Obstinacy feat says: "If a creature rolls a failure on a check to Coerce you using Intimidation, it gets a critical failure instead (so it can’t try to Coerce you again for 1 week)"

Such feat is not rare or available to NPC's only, and it wasn't addressed in the errata. Does this technically mean that a PC can be coerced? I do not intend on using the Coerce action as GM on any player, but I'm curious to know if that would technically be a house-rule.

\$\endgroup\$
9
\$\begingroup\$

Yes ...

The description of the Coerce activity says that you can target any creature:

With threats either veiled or overt, you attempt to bully a creature into doing what you want. You must spend at least 1 minute of conversation with a creature you can see and that can either see or sense you ... (CRB, pg. 247)

Player characters are creatures, so it definitely seems that a PC can be targeted by Coerce.

... but not really

The Coerce rules also reference the "Changing Attitudes" sidebar on page 246-247. This sidebar makes it clear that while players may use social skill checks to measure how influential their character is, ultimately a PC is governed by their player's choice - not the die roll.

... You can roleplay interactions with player characters, and even use Diplomacy results if the player wants a mechanical sense of how convincing or charming a character is, but players make the ultimate decisions about how their characters respond. (CRB, pg. 247)

So why have Haughty? First, NPCs with this feat limit how often a PC can attempt to Coerce them. There isn't any apparent mechanical benefit to a PC from this clause, because the player is responsible for determining their response anyway.

Nonetheless, there could be some benefits in skill challenges where a Coerce action is used in a non-traditional way. Published Paizo adventures often contain mini-games where skills and activities are used in non-traditional ways. For example, in The Flooded King's Court PCs can attempt Perform actions to convince a nobleman to allow them access to a dungeon. They are performing (so the Perform activity is narrative relevant), but the results are different than the Perform action's ordinary results. Although I don't know of any examples using Coerce, there is at least precedent for these kinds of uses.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Then how could you - or anyone for that matter - use the second part of the feat? Would it just be ignored for PCs? Would you use the Coerce action similarly to the Demoralize action? I'm curious. \$\endgroup\$ – Snakehelm Mar 6 at 19:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Elmoserpe I suspect it would be beneficial to NPCs to have that feat, to limit the result of a PCs attempt to Coerce them. I'll edit this in. \$\endgroup\$ – indigochild Mar 6 at 19:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.