D&D General Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?

[ezo]

To reiterate/clarify: Yes, in hindsight, I know that the rules support it. It was a decision I made 8 years ago. I felt like it was the wrong decision made by an inexperienced DM (me) at that time.

Which if fine, of course. As I said, not knowing the whole situation and what the "costs of failure" might be, I'm just saying I might have required the rolls. If there was really no major cost of failure, and success was fairly automatic, I wouldn't require any rolls, either.

Go back and (re)read what I quoted from the DMG regarding The Middle Path (the bit that you cut out of your response.)
It seems you prefer the "Rolling with It" style of DM adjudication. That's fine.

Oh, I know all about those from the DMG. For me, it really depends on two things:

1. How automatic do I think success or failure should be? Is this low enough or high enough to not bother rolling?
2. What happens if they fail on the check? Are there severe consequences? If so, should I really allow things to be automatic?

If the price of failure isn't a big deal, I won't ask for rolls, of course. If failure is a big deal, then you have to roll. It is where the price of failure is someplace in the middle, that auto success or failure comes into play regarding a needed roll or not.

yeah the lack of clear coup de grace rules was a major bugbear when transitioning to 5e, its still a bother, having to haggle with the DM about whether my stealth attack on the sleeping enemy should be an autokill

I don't know of any system that had coup de grace rules where a kill was automatic. Many became a save or death instance, but not automatic. Granted, there are LOT of systems I am not familiar with. LOL

 

[Grendel_Khan]

PbtA doesn't have some sort of monopoly on social mechanics. Lots of styles games use them. Look at the L5R example given upthread.

This is why I didn't want to get into it in this thread. This it how I goes—especially with PbtA. Someone mentions specific PbtA mechanics and strengths, and suddenly that gets reframed as some sort of insult to all other systems or declaration of PbtA supremacy.

Really exhausting stuff.

Anyway, yes, of course there are lots of games that do social interactions well, and not as separate minigames. Maybe L5R does, too, I haven't played it. But homebrewing D&D into something else, that isn't something I ever think makes sense—especially if it means adding subsystems that are a footnote compared to the core of D&D, which is combat.

So my answer remains the same—some PbtA games do social well in part because those games (not all PbtA, since there's no such thing, just those games) don't fully separate combat resolution from other types of action resolution. And by folding all kinds of dramatic, risky-to-PCs scenes into the same general mechanics (without simply adding subsystems) it frees them up to do stuff like having similar mechanical consequences for getting physically slashed, getting mentally rattled, or getting called out socially. Same for Forged in the Dark games, Spire, Dune, etc. But imo the social-interaction-related strengths of those games are great reasons to play those games, if that's what you're interested in, and not raw material for cobbling together more teetering Jenga towers of D&D house rules.

 

[Shardstone]

Intelligence is a hard stat to play, as it can mean many things (same with wisdom and charisma for that matter)

I’ve known quite a few people who had a very hard time grasping abstract concepts, did very poorly in school, live a worker-class life without much intellectual challenges - that a game like D&D would consider low Intelligence - and in most cases their puzzle-solving skills were impressive. They could recall ridiculous number of jokes, would easily pick up music skills, memorize songs, dive very deep in various trivia knowledge, intuit complex machinery and mechanics etc. My take on that is that it has more to do with culture, background and upbringing than “smarts”.

A 8 Int barbarian might know many things and fare better in several “intelligence” domains than a 18 intelligence wizard because it’s part of their culture and heritage.

So while I’m cool with the fact that a 8 Int barbarian shouldn’t be role-played like a NASA genius, I’m never going to shut down any idea or puzzle solution because of a character’s low intelligence. Not with scores of 6 or 8 at any case, no more than I would give extra hints to a 13 or 15 Int character.

A 18 score should be compared to a 3; a “dump stat” of 8 should not be more derivative from the norm than a 13.

This highlights to me how inadequate the current array of mental ability scores really is.

 

[Reynard]

This is why I didn't want to get into it in this thread. This it how I goes—especially with PbtA. Someone mentions specific PbtA mechanics and strengths, and suddenly that gets reframed as some sort of insult to all other systems or declaration of PbtA supremacy.

Really exhausting stuff.

Anyway, yes, of course there are lots of games that do social interactions well, and not as separate minigames. Maybe L5R does, too, I haven't played it. But homebrewing D&D into something else, that isn't something I ever think makes sense—especially if it means adding subsystems that are a footnote compared to the core of D&D, which is combat.

So my answer remains the same—some PbtA games do social well in part because those games (not all PbtA, since there's no such thing, just those games) don't fully separate combat resolution from other types of action resolution. And by folding all kinds of dramatic, risky-to-PCs scenes into the same general mechanics (without simply adding subsystems) it frees them up to do stuff like having similar mechanical consequences for getting physically slashed, getting mentally rattled, or getting called out socially. Same for Forged in the Dark games, Spire, Dune, etc. But imo the social-interaction-related strengths of those games are great reasons to play those games, if that's what you're interested in, and not raw material for cobbling together more teetering Jenga towers of D&D house rules.

D&D has always been a teetering jenga tower of bolt on systems. I mean, thr combat was a bolt on system along with the wilderness exploration. If people want to play D&D AND have a robust social encounter rules system, they can.

 

[ezo]

If people want to play D&D AND have a robust social encounter rules system, they can.

LOL great, so we can choose if we want to slog through combat, exploration, and/or social encounters!

 

[Voadam]

I don't know of any system that had coup de grace rules where a kill was automatic. Many became a save or death instance, but not automatic. Granted, there are LOT of systems I am not familiar with. LOL

1e AD&D DMG page 68 :

Special “To Hit” Bonuses:
The following general rules will be of assistance when you must adjudicate melee combat or missile fire:
Opponent encumbered, held by one leg, off balance, etc. +2
Opponent stunned, held by both legs, slowed, partially bound, etc. +4
Opponent magically asleep, held, paralyzed, or totally immobile Automatic
(Cf. MELEE, Magically Sleeping or Held Opponents.)
Apply bonuses to the chance of the opponent being struck. The opponent will gain no dexterity bonus, of course. In totally immobilized and powerless situations, the opponent can be fully trussed, slain, or whatever in 1 round, so no bonus need be given.

Page 70:

Magically Sleeping or Held Opponents: If a general melee is in progress, and the attacker is subject to enemy actions, then these opponents are automatically struck by any attack to which they would normally be subject, and the maximum damage possible according to the weapon type is inflicted each time such an opponent is so attacked. The number of attacks or attack routines possible against such an opponent is twice the number normally allowed in a round. Otherwise, such opponents may be automatically slain, or bound as appropriate to materials at hand and size, at a rate of one per round. Note that this does not include normally sleeping opponents (see ASSASSINS’ TABLE FOR ASSASSINATIONS).

 

[ezo]

1e AD&D DMG page 68 :

Special “To Hit” Bonuses:
The following general rules will be of assistance when you must adjudicate melee combat or missile fire:
Opponent encumbered, held by one leg, off balance, etc. +2
Opponent stunned, held by both legs, slowed, partially bound, etc. +4
Opponent magically asleep, held, paralyzed, or totally immobile Automatic
(Cf. MELEE, Magically Sleeping or Held Opponents.)
Apply bonuses to the chance of the opponent being struck. The opponent will gain no dexterity bonus, of course. In totally immobilized and powerless situations, the opponent can be fully trussed, slain, or whatever in 1 round, so no bonus need be given.

Page 70:

Magically Sleeping or Held Opponents: If a general melee is in progress, and the attacker is subject to enemy actions, then these opponents are automatically struck by any attack to which they would normally be subject, and the maximum damage possible according to the weapon type is inflicted each time such an opponent is so attacked. The number of attacks or attack routines possible against such an opponent is twice the number normally allowed in a round. Otherwise, such opponents may be automatically slain, or bound as appropriate to materials at hand and size, at a rate of one per round. Note that this does not include normally sleeping opponents (see ASSASSINS’ TABLE FOR ASSASSINATIONS).

Kudos. I wasn't really thinking of that as "coup de grace" rules, but you are correct.

 

[Voadam]

Kudos. I wasn't really thinking of that as "coup de grace" rules, but you are correct.

In a long time 1e campaign I ran there was an evil drow cleric magic user PC with both sleep and hold person. I became fairly familiar with that section of the rules.

When 3e came out with coup de grace rules I immediately thought of it as the equivalent section.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I like a combination.

As the DM I know the world and general behavior of a creature. Let the player role play. If it’s online with what might move the creature in a certain way, roll and see how much it was moved.

Over rule a roll if makes little sense. Consider advantage for saying something to think is especially pertinent or if there is a valued bribe; maybe disadvantage if the character is violating norms or does something clearly contra to their intent.

Preprogramming can happen. If they offer the blacksmith x, y or z, he will render info/aid. If not, he is likely to a, b or c.

I don’t like auto determination by rolls. I need more than “I roll persuasion.” Yeah you might; but what does your character say/do?

 

[ezo]

In a long time 1e campaign I ran there was an evil drow cleric magic user PC with both sleep and hold person. I became fairly familiar with that section of the rules.

When 3e came out with coup de grace rules I immediately thought of it as the equivalent section.

Unfortunately, it's been about 20 years since I played in 1E, so yeah I completely blanked on it, LOL! Now that I think about it, I do recall the whole "slaying magically sleeping" foes a lot.