D&D 4E Social interactions in 4E

[Malhost Zormaeril]

I like the implication that the new social combat rules will be optional, or at least additional. They'll be for people who want to do something other than then 'just talk it out'. They won't be the only system for resolving social encounters.

The problem with the "talk it out" camp is that, turning the reasoning on its ear, there should be a camp of people who believe that the chances of your success in hitting your foe with a sword is how well you can describe the scene, rather than any objective measure of your character's fighting ability. And, frankly, I never see anyone defend that particular position.

 

[AWizardInDallas]

Why wouldn't social interactions be handled through...oh, I dunno...good role-play? I'm not replacing role-playing for die rolls in my campaigns. I don't care what rules they write for it.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Why wouldn't social interactions be handled through...oh, I dunno...good role-play? I'm not replacing role-playing for die rolls in my campaigns. I don't care what rules they write for it.

... because the fact that I'm not an 20 Charisma Bard who can charm the pants off of anyone shouldn't prevent me from playing one, just like the fact that I'm not a mighty-thewed warrior who can tear trolls limb from limb shouldn't prevent me from playing one.

 

[BryonD]

... because the fact that I'm not an 20 Charisma Bard who can charm the pants off of anyone shouldn't prevent me from playing one, just like the fact that I'm not a mighty-thewed warrior who can tear trolls limb from limb shouldn't prevent me from playing one.

Exactly.

I've yet to meet a human being actually capable of the kind of fast talk that would be needed to achieve the things that some characters do in my game.
If you want want to try your own skills at it fine, I'm game. You'll get a fair trial. Then the dragon will eat you.

Even worse is when somebody dumps their CHA and then wants to act out a brilliant social triumph. To me it is crazy talk to say that you are using RP over rules when you are not even faithfully roleplaying the character.

On the other hand, you CAN use the rules and also roleplay the results.

 

[DonTadow]

Exactly.

I've yet to meet a human being actually capable of the kind of fast talk that would be needed to achieve the things that some characters do in my game.
If you want want to try your own skills at it fine, I'm game. You'll get a fair trial. Then the dragon will eat you.

Even worse is when somebody dumps their CHA and then wants to act out a brilliant social triumph. To me it is crazy talk to say that you are using RP over rules when you are not even faithfully roleplaying the character.

On the other hand, you CAN use the rules and also roleplay the results.

I agree and this is coming from a role playing DM. Role playing should not be something u are graded on at the table. It certainly shouldn't be the replacement for a roll. Not everyone has thespians at the game table

 

[howandwhy99]

Roleplaying, just pure speaking in character, may be the last vestige of the game to exist without rule codification. I'm glad social combat will be a variant vs. core. I'd much rather see it as a supplement book however. Do we really need rules on how we treat each other in character at the table?

 

[LostSoul]

Do we really need rules on how we treat each other in character at the table?

Nope. But rules to resolve conflicts are nice.

 

[hong]

A roll is not a substitute for chewing scenery. But then, chewing scenery is not a substitute for a rule either.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Roleplaying, just pure speaking in character, may be the last vestige of the game to exist without rule codification.

Roleplaying isn't the same as speaking in character - there's more to roleplaying.

And we're not talking about pure speaking in character here. There's no rules for that.

We're speaking about overcoming challenges by talking. Since overcoming challenges by fighting is subject to luck and the character's abilities, overcoming challenges by talking should be the same. The character's abilities should matter. That means if your character's social skills are weak, he should not be consistently able to talt his way out of everything, even if the player has a way with words. And if the character's great social skills, he should be able to accomplish something even if the player is rather shy.

I'm glad social combat will be a variant vs. core. I'd much rather see it as a supplement book however.

Why would you deny others their preferred way of playing? Why would you supply ammo to those who say D&D is a wargame who is as socially inept as its players because while it has a thousand rules to stab someone, there's no rules to resolve conflicts peacefully?

Do we really need rules on how we treat each other in character at the table?

Even 3e's (inadequate) social rules explicitly state that they're to be used for interactions between a PC and NPCs, not between PCs. Players among themselves still get to decide how they treat each other.

Of course, the character's abilities should be taken into consideration. If player one makes a great diplomacy roll to try to convince player two not to kill that guy, he should take that into consideration when deciding on a course of action. Otherwise it's bad roleplaying.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I see these as an evolution of the encounter trap from Dungeonscape. For those people who haven't read it, the Encounter Trap is a way to get the entire party involved in a trap encounter instead of just the rogue. There was a comment about traps from one of the designers saying that the new mechanics for them "won't be a surprise for those keeping up to date with the evolution of traps in the game."

So, I think that social encounters will be modeled after encounter traps.

Basically, the way encounter traps work is that they list all the methods of bypassing EACH part of a trap and then list the initiative modifier and duration of the trap.

So, you might have a trap where the first person to stand on a certain square causes spears to come out of the floor in every space in the room for 5 rounds. Each round anyone in the room gets attacked with 2 spears, and they show the attack and damage rolls of the spears. It will then list the DC to disable the WHOLE trap at the trigger plate itself before the trap goes off. It will list the AC and the hardness and hit points of EACH spear if anyone wants to destroy the ones in their square and prevent damage for the next couple of rounds. It will show the disable device roll on EACH spear to disable it.

This enabled each member of party to deal with the trap in their own way. The wizard could fireball the trap and take out all the spears causing no more damage in further rounds, the fighter could sunder them and stay where he was safe from more damage. The rogue could disable the ones in his own square, etc.

So, I believe this will be translated into an "encounter" that will enable each member of the party to help a social situation in their own way. For instance it might list the "point" value one gets for succeeding on a DC 10, 20, or 30 intimidate check and a similar value for Bluff checks and similar value for Diplomacy. Then you add all the points together and you see if it beat the DC. If it does, the party defeats the social encounter.

It would be a fun idea for all the party members to work together and I've seen some hints that they might go this route.