CubicsRube
Hero
Ok let's unpack this.
On social groups: Did y'all read where I said this part was a work in progress and I was looking for feedback? I was hoping for more than "this is wrong/sucks" and more along the lines of what you'd suggest in its place.
On how the mechanic changes play: The intention is not to provide another bonus, but rather a niche for each player in the social space. Bribe a guard? Fighter might have a better chance. Intimidate a gang leader? Rogue might be better. Often I find the character with the most CHA and skills does the most talking while everyone sits back. You may find it different for you, but I don't think my experience is uncommon. If you have another way you suggest of acheiving class differentiation in the social space then please suggest it.
On advantage versus proficiency: I don't mind the idea of giving proficiency, but I stumble on how to handle classes that are already proficient. Give them expertise? What if they have expertise? So advantage seemed easier on that front.
On why advantage: Also from a play psychology point, rolling two dice feels powerful, and if they're aware that's because their class, it feels special to them like a class ability.
On the benefit of advantage: most classes will have only a small bonus if any to charisma or social skills. For many it's a dump stat. So advantage for those types just evens the odds of more social characters giving them a fighting chance.
On the drawback of advantage: They have to take disadvantage with other groups as a balancing factor. There are still precedents to this. The example of the crowbar holds true. Want to breakdown most doors? Buy a cheap crowbar. Advantage for life!
On power vs fun: in my campaigns at least, social rolls are limited and not brainwashing. To initimidate you have to have good leverage already for example. So I'm more concerned with giving wach player a niche in the social space as above.
On class vs background: i had thought about using background instead of class and that's an option still maybe on the cards. I like the idea of bringing backgrounds more into play.
On the bard specifically: one adjunct ruling I had considered to go along with this was that a succesful use of performance could help the bard "pass off" as another class for the purpises of this advantage. It makes sense that a bard would be skilled impersonating other groups and can be a docial chameleon.
On groups in disguise: The bonus assumes that the characters know the right things to say and do for groups similar to them to persuade and intimidate. If they are in disguise then they do not get the bonus. There's never any psychic knowing of what class someone is.
On social groups: Did y'all read where I said this part was a work in progress and I was looking for feedback? I was hoping for more than "this is wrong/sucks" and more along the lines of what you'd suggest in its place.
On how the mechanic changes play: The intention is not to provide another bonus, but rather a niche for each player in the social space. Bribe a guard? Fighter might have a better chance. Intimidate a gang leader? Rogue might be better. Often I find the character with the most CHA and skills does the most talking while everyone sits back. You may find it different for you, but I don't think my experience is uncommon. If you have another way you suggest of acheiving class differentiation in the social space then please suggest it.
On advantage versus proficiency: I don't mind the idea of giving proficiency, but I stumble on how to handle classes that are already proficient. Give them expertise? What if they have expertise? So advantage seemed easier on that front.
On why advantage: Also from a play psychology point, rolling two dice feels powerful, and if they're aware that's because their class, it feels special to them like a class ability.
On the benefit of advantage: most classes will have only a small bonus if any to charisma or social skills. For many it's a dump stat. So advantage for those types just evens the odds of more social characters giving them a fighting chance.
On the drawback of advantage: They have to take disadvantage with other groups as a balancing factor. There are still precedents to this. The example of the crowbar holds true. Want to breakdown most doors? Buy a cheap crowbar. Advantage for life!
On power vs fun: in my campaigns at least, social rolls are limited and not brainwashing. To initimidate you have to have good leverage already for example. So I'm more concerned with giving wach player a niche in the social space as above.
On class vs background: i had thought about using background instead of class and that's an option still maybe on the cards. I like the idea of bringing backgrounds more into play.
On the bard specifically: one adjunct ruling I had considered to go along with this was that a succesful use of performance could help the bard "pass off" as another class for the purpises of this advantage. It makes sense that a bard would be skilled impersonating other groups and can be a docial chameleon.
On groups in disguise: The bonus assumes that the characters know the right things to say and do for groups similar to them to persuade and intimidate. If they are in disguise then they do not get the bonus. There's never any psychic knowing of what class someone is.
