Social Checks in Combat

[redrick]

Would it be a DC or an opposed roll though?

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

The DC also makes it more natural to adjust difficulty based on circumstances and what exactly the PC is trying to do. Trying to intimidate a goblin whose already lost half his hipoints, or seen some of his friends die? Sounds pretty easy. Trying to persuade a hobgoblin to change sides in a fight? Sounds pretty hard. You could add the Wisdom modifier of the target to the DC as well.

The opposed roll puts thinking about the difficulty of the proposed action on the backburner. (You could still do it with advantage/disadvantage/modifiers, of course, but choosing a DC puts the focus on, well, the difficulty of the action.)

 

[77IM]

Here are some guidelines I follow.

1) Since talking is free, I think it's OK to make social interaction checks free, too. In my mind, the check is subservient to the talking: it's something the DM calls for, to help determine the outcome of the talking. It's not something where the player says "I'm going to spend my action this turn talking." Partly this is because I want to encourage social interaction during combat, and partly because it feels more natural to many players that talking is just talking.

OTOH if the player DOES say "I'm going to spend my action this turn talking," I think they should be generally rewarded for it. Giving up an action is a big deal. Usually I just incorporate this fact into the NPC's response: if they see that the character has stopped attacking, they'll take that as a sign that the PC is serious about talking rather than fighting.

2) In general, I decide the outcome of social interaction before the roll based on what makes sense. Then, I use the results of the roll to determine "degree of success." I do it this way because I really hate when a die roll produces a result that doesn't make sense; but I also want to reward PCs who invest in Charisma skills.

But, sometimes I just can't figure out what makes the most sense. In that case, I will let the results of the roll decide.

3) The main thing about influencing an NPC is that on a success, their behavior must change somehow. Exactly how depends on the situation. This gives me a lot of flexibility to run NPCs in the way that makes the most sense to me. But the behavior MUST change, which keeps me honest and forces me to concede SOMETHING to the PCs.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

As mentioned, stating the intent is key. Find out what they wanted to achieve and discern if it occurs, in part or in full, depending on the die - or common sense.

[sblock]Intimidation is the art of getting what you want by implying violence. If you have to or have already resorted to violence, chances are you don't need to intimidate, though you could certainly enjoy checking the skill with advantage. The better a character is at intimidating, the more articulate their manipulation - and the more reliable their success.

I tell you to give me your money or I'll hit you - I'm trying to intimidate. I actually hit you then tell you to give me your money or else I'll keep hitting you, that's doesn't necessarily require an intimidation check. However, a skill check can be made to better manipulate the target. Using the skill to get you to give me all your money, on a success, could result in you carefully, with hands shaking, handing over your money.

Failing or simply not checking can result in a result, but it might not be the exact result we want. Perhaps the target wets themselves and dumps the gold on the floor our of terror, or screams and throws their gold.

(The former is known as the Bard method and favours characters relies on social skills. The latter is known as the Barbarian method, and does not. Of course, get a Bard who's not afraid to smack folks upside the head AND intimidate and man, you're cooking!)
[/sblock]

 

[Li Shenron]

The player rolled to intimidate a goblin.

[MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] gives very good advice. It's too generic for the player to say "I want to intimidate the goblin", and in fact you ended up not clearly knowing what effect it should have.

Charisma in general is the ability to influence others, and in a more specific circumstance is the ability to make someone else behave the way you want. Intimidation, Deception and Persuasion are different methods or "tools" to make your charisma work.

So next time, maybe try to ask your player to be more specific. The most obvious ideas in combat would be to force an enemy to flee or to surrender.

 

[jasper]

I was an adventurer once. I decided to intimidate a goblin. Say hi to Gary on the left.
Then I decided to intimidate a vampire. Say hi to Vic on the right.
Then I decided to intimidate an OOZE.
.....
....
....
.....
......
......
Come shake hands with my savior Jay the Gelatinous Cube.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

In future, resolving these types of situations will be easier if you follow the rule that players don't make rolls - they declare intentions and actions. "What are you trying to do and how are you doing it?"

To steal a phrase from Dungeon World, start and end with the fiction.

The player should say something like "I want to goblin to stop fighting and run away. I scream and yell at him as loud as I can while waving my sword menacingly." The GM can then decide what happens next. Perhaps the goblin just runs away because it was already looking for an escape. Perhaps it has a vendetta against the character, so keep fighting. Only if there is some doubt about it's actions should the GM call for a dice roll. In this case, perhaps Strength\Intimidation.

In this case, given the rolls in question, I'd narrate it as "You wave your sword and attempt to be menacing, and to your own mind, you fail horribly. However, the goblin is strangely impressed. It drops everything it is carrying, wets its pants, and runs."

 

[KahlessNestor]

All good advice. Part of tje problem is this was done in a pbp game, so asking "What do you want to happen" could delay everything by days, and I wanted to keep things moving. In Patjfinder I can just apply the Shaken condition and be done.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[iserith]

All good advice. Part of tje problem is this was done in a pbp game, so asking "What do you want to happen" could delay everything by days, and I wanted to keep things moving. In Patjfinder I can just apply the Shaken condition and be done.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

Once you set the expectations with the players that they need to make clear their goal and approach, you shouldn't have this issue going forward.

 

[iserith]

In this case, given the rolls in question, I'd narrate it as "You wave your sword and attempt to be menacing, and to your own mind, you fail horribly. However, the goblin is strangely impressed. It drops everything it is carrying, wets its pants, and runs."

I struck through the bit I think DM's should avoid - saying what the character is doing and thinking. I know that's a fairly common way of doing things and certain popular DMs in podcasts do it, but in my view this really encroaches on the player's role and further encourages players not to fully establish their goal and and approach. "Why bother if the DM is going to do it for me?"

 

[aco175]

Here are some guidelines I follow.

1) Since talking is free, I think it's OK to make social interaction checks free, too. In my mind, the check is subservient to the talking: it's something the DM calls for, to help determine the outcome of the talking. It's not something where the player says "I'm going to spend my action this turn talking." Partly this is because I want to encourage social interaction during combat, and partly because it feels more natural to many players that talking is just talking.

I would caution letting this go as a free action in the middle of a fight. Adding another roll would slow things down which is something 5e is trying to get away from. I can see some players adding a whole action in addition to the normal fighting action since they can now get something beneficial. Every round I can bluff to try and get advantage, even if it is a higher DC since I'm not using my real action- great, roll, roll, roll.

I do like being able to spend your action to get some of these benefits though. It does look like a very DM situation based DC though.