Bargaining and debate

[Primitive Screwhead]

I am trying to prepare for a diplomatic encounter in the WoBS and I don't think that the normal Skill Challenge really works for it, not even Stalker's Obsidian system would work

So, being me, I want to come up with a system I can use for this one as well as other cases. I am stealing from a couple sources, but want a reality check before the game {next month}.

Basic concept is that a goal is set up. In this particular case the opponent wants certain concessions and the PCs want to talk him out of them. In other cases a merchant might have an item for sale and the PCs want to talk his price down, or a guard stops them from entering the ball and the PCs want to talk him into letting them pass even tho they are not on the list.

Each goal has a set DC based on level and difficulty, and 'hit points' to show how resilient the goal is to being overcome. The base resilience I am pegging at 4.

The PC can make a check using any social skill to attempt whittle down the hit points of a certain goal. This check follows some non-4e rules.

You can roll additional dice based on the DMs perception of your description. So 1 dice with a 'I roll Diplomacy'

2 dice with a simple description added, like 'I walk up to the merchant and look at him coolly as if I know I can get a set of chain mail somewhere else.'

3 dice with cool descriptions or role-playing that use the environment and improve everyone's visualization of the scene. In this case the environment can include building on previous descriptions.

4 dice for great rp and descriptions... the kind of rare moments that will be remembered and talked about for months after the session.

Each dice that exceeds the DC deals 1 point of damage to the goals resilience which, if reduced to zero, means the PC wins!


To add twists, NPCs friendly to the PC grant an additional dice to the roll. Hostile NPCs reduce the additional dice by 1....
Which leads to the challenge goal of turning a hostile NPC into neutral and a neutral to friendly!

More twists: a normal skill check can be used to reduce the goals DC, usually by 2. Bribing {diplomacy check}, intimidating {duh!}, and evaluating {insight}.. along with a host of Knowledge checks.


Of course, the entire social encounter has to have a time element or the PCs just continue to roll dice until they win. Perhaps even each goal can have a time limit or set number of attacks it will accept before closing.

Let me know what you think!

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

No bites?

I was in a hurry last night, so tonight I will post an example... I hope


The group is preparing to infiltrate a costume ball, but don't have an invitation. They have to get past a trio of guards and the Major Domo.

Fred comes up with the idea blustering their way as scions of a minor house who should have been invited. The goal is to convince the Major Domo that they should be on the list and should be let in.

The Major Domo is 6th level and he can lose his job for letting in party crashers, so this would be a Hard check {DC 23} and he has a bit more resilience than normal.. lets peg it at 5.

The group decides to prepare with some good costumes, and makes a Bluff check to have it all set up right for a minor noble {bluff check}. A success garners them a +2 on the upcoming checks.

Fred says "We walk up and well the butler that we are nobles and to let us in..." Not enough roleplaying to garner an extra dice so he rolls Bluff and gets one 'hit', reducing the Major Domo's resilience to 4.

The Major Domo replies "Gentlemen, I regret that you are not on the list and I cannot let you in. Please step aside."

There is a group of other party goers coming up the drive, so the time pressure is on.. Fred decides to step it up a notch, using an action point to combine two attacks in one round. He says..
"I lean forward and look down my nose at the Major Domo and say 'Look you pompous over-done man-servant. I understand that your limited intelligence is why you are working at this low station and it is hard for you to understand this.. but when my father, Duke Sorenson of Glenshea, hears that you were responsible for getting in the way of me courting Lady Constance... you will be lucky to have a job in this city! LET US IN!"

{of course, these names have come up in the campaign before...}

This is worth 3 dice.. for both checks. He gets to roll Intimidate {threatening} and Bluff {linking himself with a known Duke} . He needs 4 successes to reduce the remaining resilience to zero or he will have failed and the group will get physically escorted off the premises.
The group leans forward as he rolls the dice onto the table.. holding their breath..
One - Success!
Two ... failure
three - Success!
four - Success!
five... failure! Oh Noes!

The last dice hits the table and spins... then lands as a success. The Major Domo apologizes for the trouble and ushers the group into the room.

.. and smiling widely he announces their entrance as loudly and clearly as possible to the assembled Host.




[edit]
[MENTION=2002]Chimera[/MENTION]...

This is the mechanic I am looking at using next session, please give me your thoughts!

 

[Chimera]

Sounds reasonable. Going to have to think about it a bit.

 

[Will Doyle]

Interesting.

Things I like:

• Not counting failures and instead imposing a different form of time limit (e.g. each person in the group has just one action). In my experience, counting failures sometimes focuses blame unnecessarily on certain players, or just seems arbitrary when it ends a challenge mid-flow.
• Rolling extra dice instead of just getting a series of bonuses to one roll. Rolling dice is fun.

Things I don't like:

• Despite my point above, rolling multiple dice is a huge bonus for "just" roleplaying. I have certain players who are a bit shy in these situations, and they'd suffer really badly if I implemented this system. For me, that's a bit of a dealbreaker.
• If a player pulls off one of those rare moments that will be remembered and talked about for months after the session, I'd always grant an instant success. Imagine pulling this off, and then rolling badly on all four dice - unlikely, but possible.
• It's a really minor point, but your "resilience" is exactly the same as "successes needed" - you're just counting down instead of up. Confused me at first.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Thanks Will! apparently I have to spread some xp around!

I got the 'no failures' from Stalker0's Obsidian and the more dice from a game called 'Scion'.


My main goal in this is to make the complex skill challenge matter. The encounter in the module is written as a standard WoTC skill challenge, DC 27. The un-civilized wild-elf Seeker has a slim chance at beating this {10%}, the Dragon Born Warlord has a decent chance {60%}, and the Bard... well, he can't miss.
Having roleplaying add a bonus doesn't work so well in this framework as it can turn the Seeker into the 'better' diplomat if the player has a silver tongue. By granting additional dice, the players skills are rewarded but still processed through the voice of the character.
I have dallied with the idea that skill training grants an extra die instead of adding the +5 bonus as this makes the results more reliable.


If I run it as is, basically it turns into the Bard rolling 6 times and saying "Yeah! we win!" If it was a matter of talking the way past a guard or bargaining for a better price on the room.. sure. But, this encounter is a meeting with Lord Shaaladel, the king of a neighboring country, with the intent to work out the details of his Army supporting the resistance...

What I want is an encounter where the players choices will impact the future of the plot, yet still be able to allow the Bard to highlight his specialty.

So, my intent is to have the King present the group with 4 or 5 goals that they can try and talk him down from. Since they will have a limited number of attempts, the bonus dice will be important to achieving the 'best' results from the perspective of the resistance.

Lets say the Bard decides to spend some of those attempts on gaining the King's friendship. This would allow him to build on the setting and get 4 dice per attempt, enough to knock down every goal. If he fails, then he is guaranteed to not achieve one of the goals... so which one is more important to the group?



and yes..'resilience' really should be written 'successes'

 

[Chimera]

DC 27.

My Bard;

Bluff +29
Diplomacy +32
Intimidate +24

Arcana, History, Religion (if needed) +23 each
Streetwise +27

Yup, needs some mods or I just roll six times and end up with the meeting, the pass phrase to the Princesses chambers and an invite for a weekend at their summer palace.

 

[herrozerro]

On the time limits, what are your initial thoughts? Like a whole round of PC actions or a limited amount of PCs acting?

Like you have enough time for 3 persons to act?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I am thinking more flexible than a set number of rounds or checks..altho that could work.

I plan on allowing X skill checks until Lord Shaladel gets impatient and pushes to close the discussion {a goal of its own} or starts getting stubborn {when he can't close..increase dc}

The more players join in and the more entertaining the discourse..then he would accept more checks. Similarly, if the group offends him he might shut of the negotian, reducing the number of checks he will tolerate.

It might be best to have the 'limit' be by goal.
I really am not sure {and the game is this Friday!} But whatever it is, I want to shy away from the mechanical 'roll 6 times over 10 to win' scenario

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[herrozerro]

I am intrigued by the mechanic as a whole. I think it is a great substitue for Skill challenges, I think I have a part in my game this thruday it might work. ill test it out and get back to you on how it went.

I agree that the limit should be by the challenge, but you codified at least losely the DCs and the amount of successes needed. I just thought you migt have an idea of the amount of chances you'd allow.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Update.. the game was last night and this system ended up working out better than expected.

I did make some minor changes;

- refined the criteria for additional dice to be alot cleaner:
1D for just saying 'I roll diplomancy
1D for involving part of your character through description of action, movement or speech pattern
1D for involving the plot, history, or environment {including building off of the last check}
1D for conducting the challenge in character.

- determine the end game. I added a 'goal' that the NPC can call for a check to 'close' the negotiation If the players gain enough successes on this they can keep the negotiation going for one more check. If they want to risk it, they can push to get back to a full negotiation.

I decided that Lord Shaladel would push to close when there had been 6 or 7 checks, basically when he would have lost 2 of his 5 goals.

At the start of the session I explained to the group how this was supposed to work, and the players had all been invited to this thread earlier this week.
I just wanted to make sure there was no problems over the rules. I then ran the encounter with Lord Shaladel explaining his goals.

I used the attached sheet to track the goals and show what concessions Lord Shaladel was willing to bend to {based on the players skill checks}

What happened next was awesome. An hour and a half of bickering, discussion, and some really deep involvement in the plot and story. The Bard, who was a citizen of Gates Pass, was very vehement about the cities future freedom. Everyone was put off by Lord Shaladels approach to what he considered 'lesser beings' {ie non-elfs} and his brutal approach to leading nations. At one point an OOC joke was made about how the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend'... so they should go talk with Leska about killing this evil, arrogant idiot.

After the game I didn't have much time to check, but everyone sounded positive about the mechanic and had a great time. I definitely going to continue using this method in similar encounters.


Thanks to everyone here for the feedback!