Games with great social rules

[Fenris-77]

I read up on Position and Effect. Could I get a social combat example if you have the time?

Sure. Let's say the group is going to infiltrate the Duke's ball. So everyone is in costume, fake invitations have been arranged, and the scene drops - now the group has to work the room. The guests are the usual mix of drunks and rakes, prim and proper, smart and foolish. Plus the duke is there, and he's a smart fellow, and there are lots of guards about.

The players could go a lot of ways here, but let's say that there are two people who have the information the group needs. Foolish Baron Dunce and Paranoid Viscount Eek. The foolish baron is hanging with the Duke, and the Viscount is off by himself mostly.

Postion can be read here as follows, using the Viscount as an example. If a PC walked right up to him and started chatting, even with a good line of patter, he's going to be on his guard (paranoid). So that would be risky or possibly even desperate depending on the approach. The effect there is going to be standard or even limited - paranoid schemers don't just natter on about sensitive information.

However, the players might have a clever plan. Perhaps they find out that the Viscount has a dowager aunt whom he is quite fond of who is also at the ball. Charming the dotty old lady is a piece of cake for a seasoned con, and getting here to introduce them to the Viscount (like it was her idea) is also pretty easy. Here I'd say position is trending toward controlled/risky, so things are looking up.

Our players don't just stop there. They have also found out that the Viscount is a fanatical hawker, he loves the birds. So the player also manages to suggest to the aunt that they have that passion in common and this gets folded into the introduction. So the player now has some conversational leverage to get the reticent viscount chatting. This would have effect trending up to standard or even perhaps great depending on the detail.

Both these examples make sense with the context of an initial framing by the GM of the difficulty of approaching the Viscount directly (Risky/Limited or whatever) and the players specifically working to improve the situation. Of course, this same example could be done in any game system, but position/effect grants some really useful handholds for understanding what's going on and working to improve it. In this same example I'd also probably employ a clock called Viscount's Suspicion that could handle the conversation itself it that was going to be an extended social action.

 

[pemerton]

Hey - what games have good social rules?

Burning Wheel's Duel of Wits is pretty top notch.

Others?

Do you mean social rules that can affect PCs? In that case, as well as BW and Torchbearer, I've enjoyed Prince Valiant, Marvel Heroic RP and Agon.

If I can also include rules that have a PC/NPC divide, I would add Fantasy For Real and Classic Traveller.

Mythic Bastionland I suspect might also be quite good (and to an extent can be PC-facing, as per this post), but I don't have as much experience with it.

 

[SkidAce]

Sure. Let's say the group is going to infiltrate the Duke's ball. So everyone is in costume, fake invitations have been arranged, and the scene drops - now the group has to work the room. The guests are the usual mix of drunks and rakes, prim and proper, smart and foolish. Plus the duke is there, and he's a smart fellow, and there are lots of guards about.

The players could go a lot of ways here, but let's say that there are two people who have the information the group needs. Foolish Baron Dunce and Paranoid Viscount Eek. The foolish baron is hanging with the Duke, and the Viscount is off by himself mostly.

Postion can be read here as follows, using the Viscount as an example. If a PC walked right up to him and started chatting, even with a good line of patter, he's going to be on his guard (paranoid). So that would be risky or possibly even desperate depending on the approach. The effect there is going to be standard or even limited - paranoid schemers don't just natter on about sensitive information.

However, the players might have a clever plan. Perhaps they find out that the Viscount has a dowager aunt whom he is quite fond of who is also at the ball. Charming the dotty old lady is a piece of cake for a seasoned con, and getting here to introduce them to the Viscount (like it was her idea) is also pretty easy. Here I'd say position is trending toward controlled/risky, so things are looking up.

Our players don't just stop there. They have also found out that the Viscount is a fanatical hawker, he loves the birds. So the player also manages to suggest to the aunt that they have that passion in common and this gets folded into the introduction. So the player now has some conversational leverage to get the reticent viscount chatting. This would have effect trending up to standard or even perhaps great depending on the detail.

Both these examples make sense with the context of an initial framing by the GM of the difficulty of approaching the Viscount directly (Risky/Limited or whatever) and the players specifically working to improve the situation. Of course, this same example could be done in any game system, but position/effect grants some really useful handholds for understanding what's going on and working to improve it. In this same example I'd also probably employ a clock called Viscount's Suspicion that could handle the conversation itself it that was going to be an extended social action.

Great example, however I think I'm missing something basic, perhaps about the game itself?

Are those changes in the position automatic since the players found leverage, or are there rolls involved and at what point?

 

[Piperken]

I read up on Position and Effect. Could I get a social combat example if you have the time?

Spoiler: John Harper!

In game example set up ~4:40 - 7:30

Position and effect discussion w/ above example ~10:20 - 13:30

 

[Fenris-77]

Great example, however I think I'm missing something basic, perhaps about the game itself?

Are those changes in the position automatic since the players found leverage, or are there rolls involved and at what point?

Not automatic, no. Everything about position and effect is a collaboration at some level. The GM sets P/E at X and then the players can work toward changing it, but it's the GM decides how much or what extent. It just gives the players more specific ways of approaching social problems that directly index how the GM is adjudicating it. The system also has stress dice and other extra dice to play with as well, which are also additional indexes to that same single basic roll. The game gets a lot done without adding subsystems.

 

[SkidAce]

Perfect. Thank you both.

 

[GMMichael]

Sure. Let's say the group is going to infiltrate the Duke's ball. So everyone is in costume, fake invitations have been arranged, and the scene drops - now the group has to work the room. The guests are the usual mix of drunks and rakes, prim and proper, smart and foolish. Plus the duke is there, and he's a smart fellow, and there are lots of guards about.

The players could go a lot of ways here, but let's say that there are two people who have the information the group needs. Foolish Baron Dunce and Paranoid Viscount Eek. The foolish baron is hanging with the Duke, and the Viscount is off by himself mostly.

Postion can be read here as follows, using the Viscount as an example. If a PC walked right up to him and started chatting, even with a good line of patter, he's going to be on his guard (paranoid). So that would be risky or possibly even desperate depending on the approach. The effect there is going to be standard or even limited - paranoid schemers don't just natter on about sensitive information.

However, the players might have a clever plan. Perhaps they find out that the Viscount has a dowager aunt whom he is quite fond of who is also at the ball. Charming the dotty old lady is a piece of cake for a seasoned con, and getting here to introduce them to the Viscount (like it was her idea) is also pretty easy. Here I'd say position is trending toward controlled/risky, so things are looking up.

Our players don't just stop there. They have also found out that the Viscount is a fanatical hawker, he loves the birds. So the player also manages to suggest to the aunt that they have that passion in common and this gets folded into the introduction. So the player now has some conversational leverage to get the reticent viscount chatting. This would have effect trending up to standard or even perhaps great depending on the detail.

Both these examples make sense with the context of an initial framing by the GM of the difficulty of approaching the Viscount directly (Risky/Limited or whatever) and the players specifically working to improve the situation. Of course, this same example could be done in any game system, but position/effect grants some really useful handholds for understanding what's going on and working to improve it. In this same example I'd also probably employ a clock called Viscount's Suspicion that could handle the conversation itself it that was going to be an extended social action.

The game gets a lot done without adding subsystems.

In the spirit of simplicity*, here's the Modos 2 approach to this scenario:

PC walks right up to Viscount Eek: GM chooses a Difficulty (added to GM roll) based on what the PC says/does and the viscount's disposition to the PC, and an attribute for the PC to use: Physical for beating the info out of the viscount, Mental for reasoning with him, or Metaphysical for using emotion. PC adds applicable skill points or a Difficulty bonus for tying in some backstory.

If the PC wins, the viscount spills his guts.

Just kidding.

The PC's higher roll than the GM's is a Pro (favorable), which just means something goes right. The viscount lets his guard down, drops a clue, is attracted to the PC, accidentally reveals the info is on a scroll, on his person. Whatever.

The PC's lower roll (a Con) might mean it's time for another PC to charm the dowager aunt. If she's doing some introducing, the GM lowers the Difficulty on the next contest to interrogate the viscount.

I like to use Cons to ask the player, "what went wrong?" They can't complain about a bad outcome if it was their idea! "What happens?" is fair for Pros too, but these responses are less likely to be as conservative as the Con suggestions.

*This example is based on 2 of 5 rules modules. It could be reduced to 1, though GURPS-blooded gamers could easily go more complex if desired.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

Oh hey, since there is a bit more explanation on other systems, i thought i might do into why Infinity is great stuff!

Most games offer a way to Persuade, and some break it out by different skills (intimidate, seduce, etc)

Infinity instead starts with "Means" - how are you interacting with the target? And then all of those things other games call "skills" become "status effects" the target suffers.

So you can get someone be intimidated, seduced, persuaded, panicked, confused, hesitant, and more...

And you can do it by any means you can think of: government PsyOp, direct confrontation, affecting their social connections, career influences, social engineering, data hacking, false news broadcasts, and sooooo much more!

More!

You can also cause a target to "Act"... when giving them status effects they can even be things that imply they do something within that effect, such as "to riot" or "to empty bank account" and so on.

 

[jian]

Smallville is pretty good. The commonest outcome isn’t that one side wins (gets what they want) but the other side becomes too Angry or Insecure to continue and basically storms out. Unless that’s what their opponent was going for, of course. Another lovely bit is that your Stress can be converted by a friend to Growth, so there’s a mechanical reason for pep talks and counselling. And of course the system requires you to define why you’re doing this and what you care about in your dice (Duty d8, Clark is Too Reckless d10).

The main problem with every social system I’ve ever seen is that it doesn’t really matter how good, articulate, or empathic your arguments are, just how high your stats are. Of course that’s very difficult to avoid - players are generally less articulate than their characters - but it can feel rather forced sometimes.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

Smallville is pretty good. The commonest outcome isn’t that one side wins (gets what they want) but the other side becomes too Angry or Insecure to continue and basically storms out. Unless that’s what their opponent was going for, of course. Another lovely bit is that your Stress can be converted by a friend to Growth, so there’s a mechanical reason for pep talks and counselling. And of course the system requires you to define why you’re doing this and what you care about in your dice (Duty d8, Clark is Too Reckless d10).

I need to play this game. @Campbell dropped his book off at my place, and I want to play it at some point. I am, as you know, a huge fan of Cortex, especially for they ways it can handle social mechanics. I still think my implementation of Exalted's Intimacies is soooo much fun to play!