Interesting social mechanic

[thormagni]

On Sunday, I picked up Atlas Game's "Love and War" book from their Penumbra line at the Half-Priced Books store in Greenwood. $10 and there were like five more brand-new copies sitting there (along with a bunch of other new Penumbra books. Sad really.)

The book is generally about how to run a chivalric game and more specifically how to run a knight. However, the part that caught my eye was the social combat section. It deals with machinations at court, influencing your beloved and that sort of thing, but it really is an interesting concept.

In a nutshell, every character has in essence a social Armor Class, affected by your Diplomacy skill level and other factors. And social Hit Points of a sort based on things like your Reputation and Charisma bonus. By choosing various conversational gambits you can whittle away your opponent's social Hit Points. Once you reach zero social HP, you are not allowed to use your social skills until you heal.

It's pretty fascinating stuff. I'll post more as I get through it.

 

[InzeladunMaster]

Wow, that sounds like what I was talking about in another thread. I would love to hear more.

 

[Grimhelm]

I suppose you guys know my opinion on this subject, but... Isn't adding mechanics to role playing just going to make the game more mechanical? Is this really what we want?

 

[Fyrestryke]

I reckon I straddle the line on this subject. I think some people need mechanics in order to play. If you don't need the mechanics, great! But, for some, they need to be there.

 

[thormagni]

I reckon I straddle the line on this subject. I think some people need mechanics in order to play. If you don't need the mechanics, great! But, for some, they need to be there.

Here are my thoughts, in general. They may seem disjointed, but really they are going somewhere. So, please bear with me a second.

On a kids rpg group I am a member of, the point was made a while back that D&D (and most RPGs) devote dozens and hundreds of pages to combat and how to resolve combat. While social interactions get scant mention. Which means that combat is the preferred method for solving problems. Why isn't there an equally detailed system for social interactions?

People use their character's amazing Str and Dex to do amazing, mind-bending combat actions all the time. Stuff that would be clearly impossible in "reality." Why shouldn't my super charismatic character be able to pull off amazing role-playing feats? Just because I, as a player, might not be able to envision how to talk the local cop into giving me his daughter, the keys to his police cruiser and the PIN number to his bank account, doesn't mean that my character might not be able to pull it off.

A few days ago, I read a story from the Louisville newspaper about a guy who calls up fast-food restaurants, and talks managers into taking young women workers into the office, stripping them naked and molesting them. And then have the manager and the girl tell this weirdo about it on the phone. This guy has apparently done this dozens and dozens of times. He calls, pretends to be a police officer and says the young worker has been accused of stealing some money. Then he walks the managers through the disrobing, the "searching," spankings, calisthenics, etc. These managers stay on the phones with this guy for hours, holding these young women prisoner the whole time, while going through all this crap. Making them do jumping jacks, giving them digital exams. The whole nine yards.

This isn't a game (except maybe to the sicko doing it.) This is reality. But if my 21 Charisma thief with a +16 Bluff and +16 Diplomacy wanted to try a similar stunt in a D&D game, what DM would let him get away with it? In reality, people get talked into doing crazy stuff all the time. In games, the NPCs would never, ever fall for something like that.

"The guard is not going to tell you the location of the hidden key." "The merchant is not going to let you walk away with the artifact." "The jailer is not going to be talked into letting you loose." It just wouldn't make any sense. But this sort of thing happens all the time in the real world. People are talked into betraying their employers. Sane auto dealers give people keys to Ferraris and watch them drive off, never to return. Inmates convince female guards to fall in love with them and do crazy, crazy stuff for them. Scams, cons and seductions that would never work in D&D happen all the time in reality.

So I am fascinated by the idea that there could be a D&D system that provides guidelines on how to make this work. That provides as many options for battles of wits as it does for battles with swords.

 

[InzeladunMaster]

I agree, John. I've made similar arguments before.

 

[thormagni]

I am a huge fan of espionage games and dabble a bit in reading spy stuff (not as much as I would like though, that is for sure.) But spy games usually leave me cold, because they don't have this sort of social mechanic. In fact, this Love and War book and Dynasties and Demagogues are the only RPG books I can recall reading that have such a detailed system for working out social dynamics.

I mean, I think it would be cool if a character literally COULD talk himself into victory in fights. He is naked and surrounded by armed guards bent on his capture, but he manages to effectively charm his way into getting past them and having them arm him and give him some spending money on top of it. Is it plausible? Sure. Why not?

"No, I'm not Yuri. I am Johan the shopkeeper. Yuri is a face-stealer. I was on my way to buy my poor sick mother some medicine, when that scoundrel stole my face and all my money. Now mom, poor mom, will have to suffer. Oh. And he took my sword too. He went THATAWAY! You might still be able to catch him."

That would require more than just a standard Bluff check. Or a measure of how good of a role-player I am. That would require a system in place, complete with verbal versions of feints, bull rushes, charges and attacks of opportunity. I like the idea of someone having a store of Social Hit Points that I can whittle down until I am able to convince them to do what I want. And to be able to do it without throwing a punch, casting a spell or wielding an ax.

 

[Grimhelm]

I understand that some people need this sort of thing. My only question is why do these people play at all? Wouldn't they get just as much enjoyment from sticking to a game like Runebound? My point is really somewhat off the wall, but I really see no need to accomodate people who can't play the game. It seems to me that this style is indicative of an overall trend to accomodate mediocrity and blandness.

To attack it from another angle: When Yaba went to see Yuri, he did not need to make a check to convince the other supplicants to go elsewhere. Vince and I just had fun with it and the supplicants left the tavern on their own thanks to my little ruse. Now, I could have made a dice roll, but this would seriously have deflated the improvisation of that moment. Do we really want to promote this or should we better find a way to make the guys who aren't so good at role playing better at role playing? It seems to me that offering mechanics is like saying: We know you can't hit the ball, so we are taking away your bat and providing you with rules to make it seem like you can hit the ball really well. It seems to me that a good coach/rule would try to help the player to hit the ball better, not create an illusion that makes a mockery of the game.

 

[Odovacar's Ghost]

I understand that some people need this sort of thing. My only question is why do these people play at all? Wouldn't they get just as much enjoyment from sticking to a game like Runebound? My point is really somewhat off the wall, but I really see no need to accomodate people who can't play the game. It seems to me that this style is indicative of an overall trend to accomodate mediocrity and blandness.

I get more enjoyment playing boardgames then I do RPGs. Lately, I've been having thoughts of just dumping RPGs altogether.

I'd personally love to have a social style of combat, for people like me who are not very good roleplayers. If one wants to dump the dice rolling why not just use the LARP rules. Larp is 95% roleplaying.

 

[Odovacar's Ghost]

Do we really want to promote this or should we better find a way to make the guys who aren't so good at role playing better at role playing?

I'd probably quit, if I was forced to comply.