D&D General What do you NOT want systems for?

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think the ''new'' (for 5e) Initial Reaction for each monsters as seen in Bigby's is actually the best start for social rules that would remove skills.

• Roll the initial reaction
• Let the players describes or act. No need to roleplay, just a brief description of what your character's approach will do. Just like when you attack, some will jump from their chair to do a whole fight choreography and others will just say '' I attack its leg with my sword. Done. ''.
• After a time, the DM add or remove 1 to the initial roll for each good or bad idea they add to coerce the target and compares it to the chart to see where they know stand.

Something like a lite version of the Audience rules from AiME, if you like.

Or modify the Loyalty rules:

• A NPC you encounter as a Reaction score equal to half the CHA score of the character talking with them and a maximum Reaction equal to the CHA score.
• For each demand or leverage or coercion attempt, add or remove 1d4 points.
• A character with more than 10 points will be Amicable, and with 14+ they'll go out of their way to help.
• A character with less than 10 but more than 4 will be Unfriendly, and a score of 4 and less with be Openly Hostile.

 

[mamba]

That's not what's at issue here.

What's at issue is that people are forcing others to come up with the actual rousing speech they deliver as their ultra charismatic character and demanding they come up with a convincing argument as made by the character they're playing that could be way more capable than they are.

So far the replies are basically disagreeing with that. The issue also was not which DM does it, like you claim now, the actual issue is what rules, if any, should be included for social interactions

 

[mamba]

Probably. Improvising is simply coming up with things on the fly. Acting is acting in character. I'm not talking about acting, I'm talking about improvising.

improv to me stands for improv theatre, not improvisation. I assume we all agree that improvisation cannot be avoided

This also appears to be what @Vaalingrade had in mind

What's at issue is that people are forcing others to come up with the actual rousing speech they deliver as their ultra charismatic character and demanding they come up with a convincing argument as made by the character they're playing

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So far the replies are basically disagreeing with that. The issue also was not which DM does it, like you claim now, the actual issue is what rules, if any, should be included for social interactions

That certainly doesn't seem to be what was said as far as I can tell.

Folks have explicitly said there should be no system, none at all, for social stuff. That it should be exclusively player skill and nothing more. When challenged on this regarding shy, neurodivergent, or social-anxiety players, the response was effectively, "Exposure will help make those problems better." This is manifestly untrue for a lot of people. Such conditions sometimes benefit from cautious, intentional therapy in a safe space; forcing players to engage in improv theater in order to succeed at social challenges is not a "safe" space.

A game built on requiring this is one that simply punishes players for having weak IRL social skills, despite not punishing physically weak players for their physical weakness or physically uncoordinated players for their awkwardness.

If the reason to eliminate Cha skill systems is because people have social skills IRL, we should be doing the same for all other skills people can have IRL too. Where's the Fighter's fencing skills? Where's the Rogue's ability to move unseen? These are things real people can do. Why do they get systems when social skills apparently shouldn't?

 

[mamba]

Folks have explicitly said there should be no system, none at all, for social stuff. That it should be exclusively player skill and nothing more

don't think I interpreted anyone as saying that, and the one you interpreted that way clarified that it was not what he meant, if I recall correctly.

If anyone does, I am with you, it should not be based on player stats but on char stats in some way (minimal rules or more elaborate)

 

[Vael]

To be bluntly honest, part of the joy of TTRPGs is the power fantasy of playing someone stronger or cleverer or more charming or more capable of casting magic spells than I am ... so yeah, I'd like a system to enable that.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Thinking about this based on another thread but it's kind of a tangent:

When you open up a D&D rule book,what sorts of rules systems make you wrinkle your nose. As an obvious example, a lot of folks don't want "social combat" and many players of old school games could very much do without skills.

What, in your personal preference, can D&D do without or is better off not having rules for?

Social combat is usually terrible, even as someone who likes to have some rules for social challenges. That said, I think the Doctor Who 5e game’s r counting building might be close to something on that end.

I don’t want D&D to have more social rules that just action adjudication, though, even if I want that from other games.

The main thing I don’t want is for the game mechanics to ever decide for me how my character feels about something or reacts to something in thier own mind.

Or they use the safe space of the game to learn and test out their social skills.

Some people might, most would just not bother trying because the game is clearly messaging that it doesn’t want them to.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

At the risk of angering the entire Enworld community, I'd love to see Multiclassing go the way of the Dodo.

Or, if Multiclassing MUST be endured, I'd like the following rules:

1) You can only have 2 classes. No Fighter 3/Rogue 3/Sorcerer 1/Druid 2.
2) At least one of the classes needs to be Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, or Wizard.
3) When you Multiclass, you must continue taking levels in the 2nd class until your 2 class levels are equal. After that, neither class can be more than 1 level off from the other class (optional)

But why tho?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

don't think I interpreted anyone as saying that, and the one you interpreted that way clarified that it was not what he meant, if I recall correctly.

The exact quotes, without alteration or reduction:

Social abilities and skills shouldn’t be in the game. That’s what roleplaying is for.

Or they use the safe space of the game to learn and test out their social skills.

I don't advocate for removing social stats as I'm firmly in the camp that holds your stats should inform your roleplay. But I do advocate for removal of social skill rules.

Why? Because roleplaying social interactions are the one aspect of the game that doesn't need to be abstracted by the rules or game system: we can do these interactions in real life at the table.

Pretty much everything else does require abstraction, because we can't functionally do those things in real life at the table; and those abstractions use skills, stats etc.

As someone with social anxiety and ADHD I can say that yes, actually having to roleplay instead of just throwing dice to cover social interactions has helped me immensely.

Yep. I actually love the social interaction advice in 5E DMG. It gives the option of approaches. That's basically what we did back-in-the-day. You can RP it or you can describe how you're doing it, then roll for it, if necessary. You don't have to RP bribing the guard if you don't want to, but you do need to engage with the interaction by at least describing your approach. Are you dropping a bag of coins on the ground and saying "Oh, look what I found" or are you palming the coins to the guard or are you just dropping a bag of coins into their hand and telling them to take the money and live. But pressing the "social skill" button on your character sheet and spitting out a number for the referee is just a pointless waste of time.

Not one of these statements from Overgeeked or Lanefan "clarified" that what was meant was not the complete deletion of the social skills rules. Both of them explicitly want those rules removed, so that people absolutely have to actually perform the action themselves. The closest we get is, in that last quote, that Overgeeked now allows for merely "describing" the action rather than the derisive, mocking "pressing the 'social skill' button on your character sheet," which is absolutely the kind of thing someone would say if they were being charitable and positive about the difficulties others might face with social activities.

If anyone does, I am with you, it should not be based on player stats but on char stats in some way (minimal rules or more elaborate)

Both Overgeeked and Lanefan explicitly want social skills removed, so that it is completely dependent on the player to be persuasive and convincing. That's an unacceptable requirement in a game that is meant to embrace a wide variety of people, especially neurodivergent players and those who deal with issues of social anxiety, depression, alexithymia, etc. Yes, for some people, being put on the spot and required to produce improvisational RP can be useful. For others, it will ruin the experience and drive them away.

No one here--literally not one person--is advocating for the idea that players can just declare "I persuade!" with zero preamble. Nobody. Not one person. Yet that is the straw-man that both Overgeeked and Lanefan punch down to justify their claim that social skill rules should be deleted with prejudice.

They should not. The rules that exist should actually be enforced. And those rules, surprise surprise, do actually require you to justify your actions. Just like the use of any skill or proficiency or whatever else, in any edition of D&D.

 

[mamba]

Not one of these statements from Overgeeked or Lanefan "clarified" that what was meant was not the complete deletion of the social skills rules. Both of them explicitly want those rules removed, so that people absolutely have to actually perform the action themselves.

neither one says anything about removing the attributes or rolls against a DC.

They do not want some rules that remove the need to do more than engage with those rules and roll a dice, where the player can say nothing at all about how they persuade an NPC, they just say 'I use skill X' and then make a successful check thanks to the char's high CHA

actually having to roleplay instead of just throwing dice to cover social interactions

You can RP it or you can describe how you're doing it, then roll for it,

I don't advocate for removing social stats as I'm firmly in the camp that holds your stats should inform your roleplay