Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4669469" data-attributes="member: 710">Regarding &quot;free-form&quot; vs &quot;detailed&quot;: I remember that we have exchanged ideas on making non-combat more like combat, including stuff like an equivalent for hit points. I am trying to figure out why this idea doesn't appeal to me. I like a reasonably detailed combat system. But a &quot;combat-like&quot; approach to social encounters or navigating a dungeon somehow feels wrong to me. Would you also agree that it is going too far, or would you go for that approach? Here is an example system: In a social challenge, each skill check might represent an argument or counter-argument. Your opponent has a certain amount of &quot;social points&quot; (which might depend on what the PCs want to achieve), and each successful attack costs him points. At the same time, he gets to &quot;roll back&quot; and deal damage to the PC social points, and whoever loses all his points, must accept the NPCs demands. (Maybe you could use &quot;Bloodied&quot; for in-between states of compromises.)I think what you had suggested looked a little similar, but it's been some time...I am trying to figure out _what_ I don't like about these systems, and I think it is because I have no idea what these individual rolls &quot;mean&quot; in the game world. Now, we might often have no clues what hit points represent exactly in 4E. But basically, if I make an attack roll, I can describe what I am doing - I swing my sword in some fancy way and if I hit the enemy is hampered and if I don't I fail. I can basically do this all day, regardless of whether the combat takes 3 rounds or 30. Ultimately, I might repeat myself a lot (or don't bother to narrate anything), but that is not a big problem, because I can accept combat being so repetitive.But my approach to playing a social scenario would be different. I would try to decide what my character is saying, and a roll represents that. But I can only make up so many things I can say (or describe saying). If the system tries to resolve the scenario with too many dice, I have no idea what to say, and I'd have to go back to not describing what I actually do, or repeating myself, and either feels &quot;wrong&quot; to do. Of course, this just &quot;proves&quot; to myself that my approach to &quot;social combat&quot; fails for me. Maybe your idea would be better?Maybe a different approach might be to divide the social encounter in various aspects. You roll once for &quot;properly adressing the NPC(s)&quot;, one roll for &quot;intoning the argument&quot;, one roll for &quot;explaining the logic&quot;. That would cut down the number of things to talk about... But it seems a little ... fiddly. THere still doesn't seem to be a big point to it. Another aspect might be &quot;Where are the tactics?&quot;. Combat is full of tactics. Who to attack when with what power, combat option or spell. Where to move? Can I find something similar in a non-combat challenge? Social, Exploration, Investigation, Research? What is the equivalent of a &quot;charge&quot; in exploration or research?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4669469, member: 710"] Regarding "free-form" vs "detailed": I remember that we have exchanged ideas on making non-combat more like combat, including stuff like an equivalent for hit points. I am trying to figure out why this idea doesn't appeal to me. I like a reasonably detailed combat system. But a "combat-like" approach to social encounters or navigating a dungeon somehow feels wrong to me. Would you also agree that it is going too far, or would you go for that approach? Here is an example system: In a social challenge, each skill check might represent an argument or counter-argument. Your opponent has a certain amount of "social points" (which might depend on what the PCs want to achieve), and each successful attack costs him points. At the same time, he gets to "roll back" and deal damage to the PC social points, and whoever loses all his points, must accept the NPCs demands. (Maybe you could use "Bloodied" for in-between states of compromises.) I think what you had suggested looked a little similar, but it's been some time... I am trying to figure out _what_ I don't like about these systems, and I think it is because I have no idea what these individual rolls "mean" in the game world. Now, we might often have no clues what hit points represent exactly in 4E. But basically, if I make an attack roll, I can describe what I am doing - I swing my sword in some fancy way and if I hit the enemy is hampered and if I don't I fail. I can basically do this all day, regardless of whether the combat takes 3 rounds or 30. Ultimately, I might repeat myself a lot (or don't bother to narrate anything), but that is not a big problem, because I can accept combat being so repetitive. But my approach to playing a social scenario would be different. I would try to decide what my character is saying, and a roll represents that. But I can only make up so many things I can say (or describe saying). If the system tries to resolve the scenario with too many dice, I have no idea what to say, and I'd have to go back to not describing what I actually do, or repeating myself, and either feels "wrong" to do. Of course, this just "proves" to myself that my approach to "social combat" fails for me. Maybe your idea would be better? Maybe a different approach might be to divide the social encounter in various aspects. You roll once for "properly adressing the NPC(s)", one roll for "intoning the argument", one roll for "explaining the logic". That would cut down the number of things to talk about... But it seems a little ... fiddly. THere still doesn't seem to be a big point to it. Another aspect might be "Where are the tactics?". Combat is full of tactics. Who to attack when with what power, combat option or spell. Where to move? Can I find something similar in a non-combat challenge? Social, Exploration, Investigation, Research? What is the equivalent of a "charge" in exploration or research? [/QUOTE]

Verification