D&D 5E What is a Social challenge, anyways?

[Staffan]

it's occured to me what has been niggling at me throughout this conversation: the use of the term roll-playing, i admit i had thought it instead referred to characters acting out of character in order to utilise their most numerically effective methods of solving a problem,
when johnny-honest the paladin famed for his truthfullness willingly and unprompted walks up front and centre to bluff all the guards with his +12 deception even though this is still the same character who claimed not even a half-hour ago that they'd rather be run through with a blade than lie if they could help it, 'but they're the one with the CHA bonuses so it makes sense that they'd make the checks right?' says their player.

Clearly, a man who subscribes to the tenets of Marxism.
"The secret of life is honesty and fair-dealing. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made." – attributed to Groucho Marx, probably in error.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

it's occured to me what has been niggling at me throughout this conversation: the use of the term roll-playing,

it seems the distinction between role play andd roll play is how much you want to demonize someone for not useing 1 true Role playing...

if anything I would argue the issue that we wanted to avoided is the WORSE...

in 3.0 we had a SOrcere/ranger with a high (I want to say he started with a 16 or 17 cha who spent skill pts ) a new idea so they were not optimized) on cross class cha skills being played by a shy stuttering kid... and the most experienced role player at the table who happened to also be a salesman (andd a jerk but that is another story) had a barbarian with an 8 or 9 cha and spent no points in it... but kept talking circles around the kid...

5 or 6 sessions in after the 3rdish warning to at least let the other guy try, after a stirring speech and great RP i had the barbarian make a check... and he got like a 4 and so everyone ignored him and said he was speaking nonsense... when the ranger/sorcerer said " can i try to do that" and he rolled MUCH higher and the phrase "can I try to do it" was enough to get the roll our whole gaming experience changed

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm just waiting for someone to actually post an example of a SC scenario that would be significant enough to warrant that sort of time during a session. Role-playing through it is more fun for me, and certainly when a check is called for it to determine the direction it takes, roll.

I posted an entire session notes

 

[DND_Reborn]

My group is generally cautious and when they heard there were signs of a dragon in the area they were headed they did some investigation. The eventually verified there was a dragon and it was "about the size of a horse." So they confidently proceeded with their plan. Sure enough, they came across the dragon...and its parent! The parent dragon wiped out half the party before they end of the first round!

So... what, their failure at a SC led them to only learning about the young adult and not the adult??

Regardless, without knowing exactly what happened, I would think they behaved rather foolishly. It's a dragon. You should never proceed with any measure of confidence, and we all know the best laid plans rarely work out as intended--if at all LOL!

Expecting a mated pair (even as young adults), a parent, a rival, minions, etc. would always make me cautious, personally.

We got planshifted to an alternate reality... similar but not the exact sme as our game world... in this world (to our suprise) a group of artificers are the big bads... they have a guild, they killed a god and used his/her/it (still not sure what one) energy among like a few dozen of thema nd there constructs... so everyone fears artificers.

My chharacter is a multi class artificer wizard (battlesmith blade singer) and I have a construct that I use as a joke... he looks like Gen 1 grimlock with glowing claws... but he is my buttler and I don't use him for fights.
we got 3 hints we missed that he was going to cause trouble... but when someone in a town saw him and assumed I was (I thought ) royalty I played up "Yeah, I'm with thguild, yeah I'm a powerful artificer"
IF we had looked into it at ALLL we would have realized how bad that was... so an assasination attempt, and and army running me (us) out of a city later bright claw is now hidden... but that drew the attention of the guild. Opps

by the way wee heard a few mutterings from3 different sources and never asked before this town what was up...

Well, first, this involves Artificers, so already the entire party deserved to be TPK'ed and the DM publicly humiliated for letting one into his game and basing a major theme of the world on them.

Why did you miss the hints? Why didn't you investigate them more, especially when (if?) you had already realized you were on a different plane?

Neither of these seem to me a SC where failure led to significant consequences....

I posted an entire session notes

How was that any kind of a SC???

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Which didn't seem to have any impact, did it? They found out when the got to the moon about pirates and the king's new fleet. So it delayed them getting the information, but they got it anyway.

it changes the whole dynamic... including knowing there might BE a fleet waiting when they get there. It changes what plot they might take "You know the less pay to go to the other astroid for a alchol run might be easier since we wont have a chane of hitting a fleet of pirate hunters... or pirates"

Now, if during the 10-day chat/journey, them being attacked by pirates and not having any foreknowledge that might have made a difference could have had some impact.

I rolled for random encounters and they got none... theya re a small ship and staying away from main shipping lanes

Which is an issue I've long had with D&D, particularly 5E...

we didn't have a lot of fails in 2e 3e or 4 e either... infact those stories are the ones we tell the most because they stand out.

But they got one, and that was all that is needed for the adventure to go on, right?

I mean do you think a single fail should END the adventure??

In what way?

if they knew about the fleet and the prates they would have been more cautious, and most likely have not taken this job but an easier one.

So what? They didn't need to have the whole picture, did they?

I mean not every time no, but overall if you miss too much you could walk right into a attack you can't handle

Sure, having it might have changed things, but unless those changes were significant / meaningful, what's the point?

the piont is to play. to get into the character and play the role and see where it comes out... if I had a time machine and I went back and changed some successes to fails and fails to success I guarantee that the entire night would have gone differently.

(I'm really trying to get this, not just being obtuse or difficult!)

I am hoping so.

again, the more knowladge of the world (in this case system) they have the better choices they can make. SOmetimes the mistake is not talking to an NPC, or not going to check out a rumor... sometimes the 'mistake' is rolling bad and not catching the lie or the hidden worry.

sometimes the Social encounter gives you information, or allies, or resources... and sometimes it's just part of the story and shapes it... but you don't know till you play it out

EDIT: I want to add, I've also run a number of sessions without a single combat, so that doesn't surprise me really. Personally, I try for at least one per session because I know a couple players love combat more than anything else and I want them to have fun, of course.

it iss not uncommon for us to go 1 or 2 sessions with social and exploration focus, the longest we ran was like 4 or 5, I know @HammerMan talks about whole campaigns sometimes...

but sometimes the opposite, I have had months of dungeon crawl where every room is a trap, a puzzle or a fight

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Why did you miss the hints? Why didn't you investigate them more, especially when (if?) you had already realized you were on a different plane?

1 we missed some insight checks (in fact between locked doors and wisdom skill checks I am nto sure what has us worse) also when we missed the checks we assumed (You knwo what that does to me and you) that this artificer guild was like the mage guild back home...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well, the DM doesn't decide (in that example) if the NPC helps or not, just the degree to which the NPC will help.
Or the DM wants to allow the roll to dictate the degree of assistance (which I believe is your concept).
Or the DM could also decide (due to role-playing or the desire to forward the adventure), that the NPC will help and no roll is needed.
Or the DM might decide the NPC won't help (because the adventure requires the PCs look for an alternative or just wants them to "walk").

In 5E, the DM calls for the roll when the result is in doubt. In the 3rd and 4th, there is no doubt--the NPC will help or won't as the DM dictates. The 1st and 2nd leaves the outcome in doubt, so asks the player to roll. How the DM deals with the success or failure is up to them, of course.


Well, that is the thread title, sure, but he goes on in the OP to ask a bunch of questions about it.

Anyway, for the most part, social challenges in 5E should be resolved via role-playing as much as possible, not roll-playing, IMO. It is the only challenge we can easily resolve without dice rolling. Combat can't really be "acted out", nor can exploration challenges. So, we have rules and resort to rolls to resolve them.

Can you hit the creature attacking you? Make an attack roll.
Can your PC swim the river? Roll a Strength (Athletics) check.
Can you convince the guard to let you into the prison? Role-play it or make a Charisma (Persuasion, Deception, or Intimidation) check.

We know combat requires multiple rolls to resolve due to how it is designed in 5E and the stakes involved.
Can swimming a raging river require multiple rolls to resolve as well? Certainly, and depending on factors, a DM might want a single roll for success or several.
You can certainly require multiple rolls for convincing the guard, but you can also role-play it out. For a role-playing game, why would you choose to roll? Maybe they are newer players who aren't comfortable with it, but otherwise I would think encouraging this part of the game is sort of the point of it being "role-playing".

There's more than one RP technique in the world, and not all of them are the antithesis of using dice, that is a narrow view and seems like an excluded middle kind of argument.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Who gets to call for a reaction check? OA doesn't speak about this - but with so many mechanical elements that presuppose them, it seems that it will only work if the GM doesn't have total fiat here.

Well 1e DMG encounter rules say that the party chooses an action, attack, parley, avoid, flee, etc. When the encounter starts. So the players actually get to say. I mean the DM can manage framing in a way that excludes the possibility, but it's mostly a player choice.

 

[pemerton]

I suspect that Faramir recognized Aragorn's "right" to kingship in the moments where Aragorn saved Faramir's spirit in the House of Healing, plus Frodo had also already forewarned Faramir of Aragorn and his lineage:

<snip>

Now add onto this Faramir's respect for Gandalf and Gandalf's recognition of Aragorn's claim. We are also told that people can recognize Aragorn's kingship and Numenorian heritage at times. I kinda get the impression that Faramir never once bothered to press any claims. It probably would have been out of character if Faramir and Aragorn entered into any social contest here. There is simply too much "divine right" thinking in Tolkien.

If I imagined approaching this using Cortex+ Heroic (which I've used for MERPing), I could see Aragorn's player establishing an Asset (say, Acknowledged by Faramir) during the House of Healing scene. There might also be Assets established by Frodo's player and/or Gandalf's player. And then these would all be used by Aragorn's player to resolve/remove a Scene Distinction along the lines of Steward or King?

This is one thing I like about MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic: it straightforwardly supports the importance of scene questions that are not manifestations of any particular protagonist or antagonist. (I don't know Fate very well, but imagine it can use Aspects in a similar fashion.)

I'm making this point in case @James Gasik and any other thread participants are interested in other ways that social/emotional questions can be presented and resolved in FRPGing.

 

[pemerton]

We roll plenty of checks for social encounters as well as role-play them, I just don't see how complicating a rather straight-forward process into a series of rolls and interactions is much fun. But tastes differ...

Why would anyone complicate the rather straightforward process of resolving a fight by a single set of opposed rolls by using the apparatus of attack rolls, damage rolls, initiative, combat rounds, etc?

I posted an example on the first page of this thread, of the resolution of a social challenge in 4e D&D using a skill challenge. I think it illustrates why it is more interesting to have the scenario actually unfold via an extended sequence of play.

Or the DM might decide the NPC won't help (because the adventure requires the PCs look for an alternative or just wants them to "walk").

Well, if the GM decides that an NPC won't die, because "the adventure" requires that NPC to be alive, then there is no need for the combat mechanics. I don't think that shows that, in general, combat mechanics are pointless.