How do you handle social skills in D&D?

[Imaro]

Someone throw some xp towards the Jester for me? Must spread.

That's exactly how we do it too. We describe what/how we are doing it, then cast our die and interpret the results.

You guys only read the title... didn't you?

 

[OnlineDM]

I play it that social skills are generally for use on NPCs, not on PCs. Unless there is magic involved, I don't usually allow a skill check to push a belief on a PC.

In some games, where it is genre appropriate, I will allow NPCs to Bluff PCs, because it is a short-term thing - a verbal feint, if you will. The PC will come to his senses a moment later, and be able to act knowing his was bamboozled for a moment.

How does this work when an NPC actually does lie to a PC? I'm gathering that this can still happen. Is it just about player skill here?

"The deranged wizard says, 'Your companion never came to my tower; I've never heard of the man.' "

The player then either says, "I don't believe him," or, "I guess we're at the wrong deranged wizard's house."

It's up to the players to accept things as the GM presents them or not - is that how it's handled?

 

[Mort]

1. Player vs. player... One PC is trying to actively use a social skill on another PC.

My group has been together for a long time so the dynamic is very different from a new group or a Con game. I just let the players free roleplay/discuss with an occasional reminder to each player re: their and the other person's actual social skills. Rolls are generally not involved, though very occasionally I'll have the players roll just so they can see what level of persuasiveness etc. they are supposed to play too.

2. NPC vs. Player... A NPC is actively using a skill such as Bluff, Intimidate, etc. on a PC.

Generally, I will roll for the NPCs check and then adjust accordingly. For example if the "intimidating" guard rolls a 1 when trying to bully the PC I'll do something like have my voice crack in the middle of his addressing the PC (or something else to come off as unintimidating as possible etc.) Or if the PC is bluffing and rolls poorly, I'll "accidentaly" throw in something that the PCs know to be blatantly untrue.

If the check is high (say higher than their insight), I'll:

1) play it straight - I'm a lawyer and a decent poker player, I can say just about anything with a straight face ; and/or

2) if absolutely necessary, I'll "remind" the player that they really do want to believe the NPC and to react accordingly.

 

[WHW4]

You guys only read the title... didn't you?

No, read the entirety of the thread. Care to elaborate? I thought I explained how we did this thing he asked.

 

[Umbran]

No, read the entirety of the thread. Care to elaborate? I thought I explained how we did this thing he asked.

You answered for a PC using a social skill on an NPC. He's asking about the other way around - NPC using social skills on a PC, or a PC using them on a PC.

 

[WHW4]

You answered for a PC using a social skill on an NPC. He's asking about the other way around - NPC using social skills on a PC, or a PC using them on a PC.

If an NPC successfully Bluffs a PC, I expect that character to play along with it, regardless if the player believes it or not; lest next time they try to Bluff someone and it succeeds I just have the guard say, "Mehhhh, I don't know about that...." and have him do whatever he was going to anyway.

You can't roll the dice and abide by it's results ONLY when they are favorable towards you.

Same goes for PC to PC interactions. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

I guess I thought it was clear. I was agreeing with Jester's methodology (speak, roll, interpret) and adding that, in my opinion, the rules should be the same regardless of who does the interacting.

 

[Imaro]

I guess I thought it was clear. I was agreeing with Jester's methodology (speak, roll, interpret) and adding that, in my opinion, the rules should be the same regardless of who does the interacting.

My bad, I thought you were agreeing with Jester's example... which I didn't think really answered the questions I proposed.

 

[WHW4]

No worries, we all seem to talk past each other sometimes on forums. Nature of the beast.

My basic thoughts on it are rules-based. For me, as a player and as a DM, I love having that predefined structure that says "If x, then y." Now that said, I'm open to all sorts of approaches, but I like them to be concrete. I'd hate to be rolling Bluff v. Sense Motive v. an NPC guard, then when I turn around and try to Bluff another party member, suddenly it's "up to them" whether it's believable or not.

Diplomacy v. other party members is a little different. Most of that can be hashed out in-character without resorting to dice. I've rarely seen a disagreement in-party that facilitated a roll to see if someone goes along with something; this usually boils down to straight character difference.... which to me doesn't really need to be rolled.

 

[gamerprinter]

Usually player vs. player interaction doesn't require and rolls at all. However, if a player intends for their character to lie to the other PCs - I ask if that's what the player intends, then I require bluff and sense motive checks by the players involved. This does happen, though it is rare for our group. When lying is not an issue, all social interactions are roleplaying opportunities only.

Really I treat NPCs the same. If an NPC is trying to lie to the party, then Bluff and Sense Motive checks come up. Otherwise its me as GM roleplaying the NPC and the players roleplay back. It's only when an issue comes up that require something more specific do dice ever come into play.

We've never really had problems with social interaction in our group.

 

[WHW4]

Usually player vs. player interaction doesn't require and rolls at all. However, if a player intends for their character to lie to the other PCs - I ask if that's what the player intends, then I require bluff and sense motive checks by the players involved. This does happen, though it is rare for our group. When lying is not an issue, all social interactions are roleplaying opportunities only.

Really I treat NPCs the same. If an NPC is trying to lie to the party, then Bluff and Sense Motive checks come up. Otherwise its me as GM roleplaying the NPC and the players roleplay back. It's only when an issue comes up that require something more specific do dice ever come into play.

We've never really had problems with social interaction in our group.

Do you make the rolls in the open? Is there ever a problem (even unintentional) with the group meta-gaming a situation if they do see rolls occur?

We do ours in the open to facilitate speed of play and to keep things as honest as possible. We do occasionally have to remind people "hey, you bought that guy's story, remember?"