Learning How To Roleplay Non-Hack

[willpax]

First, I agree wholeheartedly with those who say that a detailed social world (that the players understand) is a must for a roleplaying-intensive adventure. I try to work with the players to flesh out background--and this will inlcude giving them an understanding of what they know, how others react to them, and how various situations work out.

I also use several mechanics to level the table (so to speak) among those players who have extroverted, dynamic personalities and those who do not. First, I allow flexible skill checks to modify NPC behavior (loosely according to the chart in the DMG) with bonuses (or penalties) based in player interaction. For example, the party was dealing with the leader of a clan of lizard men, trying to defend a member of the clan from charges of disloyalty and incompetence (charges that were partially true). They have had few dealings with this culture (-2). They use their aristocrat as a spokesman (reputation check (using system from Wheel of Time RPG) works, +2). The wizard, true to character, contributes by spelling out why it would be in the leader's political interests to not punish the person in question (good argument by player, +2). The group promises to help in the future, punctuated by a threatening display from the figher (successful intimidate +2). The aristocrat's player makes his speech, which I judge for effectiveness based on my knowledge of the NPC's agenda, taste, and interests (in this case, merely passable--0). Only after all of these players have had a chance to influence the outcome (circumventing the "netrunner" problem), and actual roleplaying has been allowed to occur and affect the situation, does a skill check come: a diplomacy roll, modified as above, which barely works.

Short answer: a flexible approach to skill checks and aid by others in the party can provide a mechanic that encourages players to select knowledge and social skills for players, fights the tendency to over-specialize characters, and mitigates the imbalance between players of different personality types. And all of this is done within d20 mechanics.

 

[Agback]

they players need to FULLY understand how their society works...

That is usually a great help, and one of the best arguments for basing an RPG setting on some fairly accessible model that players are likely to know about and able to research (like a favourite work of fiction or an historical setting). It is also the reason that my fantasy setting has a 12,000-word players' introduction, a 100,000-word alphabetical encyclopaedia, and a website. It is also a great help for many players to have role models available in the shape of literary and historical heroes.

But...

I did once run a campaign in a setting that only took shape around the events, and in which I allowed the other players to establish features of the world on the fly, exactly as I was doing. It was a considerable success, but I don't know why, and have never been able to reproduce the success of that approach.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Agback]

Do you see what I'm saying? What do you think? What kind of tecniques, skills, and approaches would you think are good in order to *teach* players and DM's alike in how to run and organize such "adventures."?

You might be interested in this article, which explains a couple of basic techniques. They are specifically designed for plot-driven adventures rather than social-interaction adventures per se, but there is a fair degree of overlap and you might find the article interesting, if dated.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Inez Hull]

Got to agree with the comments about the players understanding where their characters fit into the society. We recently started a new campaign using Rolemaster set in a Warhammer "Old World" styled Europe. The wealth of background knowledge which was available to all the players really helped us to get into character and brought out some of the best and most enjoyable roleplaying we've ever had.

The other part of the familiar setting that really enabled us to get into character was accents. Having the GM and all the players speaking in hammy European accents REALLY added to the level of roleplaying. Admittedly we indulged heavily in stereotypes and have little talent as voice actors, but it didn't matter. The fact that everyone was speaking in strong character accents and playing in a setting much more morally neutral than usual brought out some great roleplaying and a much higher level of roleplay driven action.

 

[Dispater]

Great topic as always, SHARK

The DMG offers very litle in the way of encouraging new players to roleplay rather than rollplay. I think some of the problems of this 3e is that a game mechanics and a single dice roll replaces many of the situations that can rather be roleplayed (Diplomacy and Bluff checks, etc) for a more enjoyable gaming experience. Personally my campaigns are a blend of social interaction and some doze of combat - and the PCs always preffer to talk their way out rather than hack and blast through everything that comes their way. I award that to a much greater extent than usual.

All this may root down to experience points and awards as by 3e. You grab your sword, go into the dungeon, kill the monsters, you get experience, gold and magical items. You go to a dinner party and chat up the Dutchess - you get nothing. Strictly by the book. Of course my games are not like that at all. I've constistently never used the CR and ECL tables to distribute experience. Often personal influence and prestige can count for more than a huge hoard of gold.

Player knowledge of my camaign come along as I play. I always provide with a healthy share of background information - but as we all do, they learn more as life goes on. I must admitt it has never been as detailed as to questions regarding where the good wool comes from has come up - but I ensure that each of the players understand their background, and a few small things such as how they bury their dead, how they greet each other etc. Summing them up, all these small things really make a difference.

My 2c

-Dispater

 

[Deadguy]

To me, any game written as generically as D&D3e will have difficulty inclusing much advice as to how to role-play, in the sense of the hows and wherefores of dealing with NPCs. Why/ simply because the game is generic. The writes can't know what model of society or societies that the PCs will engage with. For example, the 'default' D&D such as there is one seems to be mediaeval European trappings around a fairly modern society. But what if the DM decides to add a more 'authentic' feudal feel? Or prefers soemthing along the lines of Imperial Rome? Or actually tries to create a society off his own back using the D&D ruleset as thestepping-off point? In each of these societies, the 'correct' mode of interaction will be different. Indeed the final arbiter will be the understanding and opinions of the DM. It doesn't matter if I, as a player, am a major in classical history and the DM learned all he knows about Rome from watching History channel, his interpretation is the one that you need to understand.

Having thus defended D&D3e I will say that it would have been a good idea to at least talk a little about how the society that lies behind the DM's adventures is significant for certain types of adventures. And that a little verisimilitude here makes a huge difference to successfully portraying a society. It wouldn't have had to have been more than a page or so. It doesn't have to be a document like Debrett's with the minutiae of the rules of modes of address and precedence. Rather it needs to warn DMs that in planning their settings they need to think about the society in which the adventurers are moving. I regard it as one of the weaknesses of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting that it doesn't bother discussing the societal structure aspects leaving FR to feel like a Hollywood version of Camelot.

Looking more widely to the question that prompted this discussion: how do you persuade PCs to interact with the setting in ways that aren't dependent on their combat prowess? I have to agree that the cornerstone is the showing by doing approach. If you think that the players will be rather awkawrd with their dealings with the Duke, then play a little scene out before them where another NPC has an audience with the Duke. Use speech and mannerisms to portray the different sides and the respect due. Repeating this for a variety of social situations should help your players understand what's expected. Naturally, you may well want to make social skill rolls as well, modifying the reult with circumstance bonuses for the quality of the PC play. This encourages the players whilst assuring them that the social skills of their characters provide a secure foundation for their play. I found that in time I was unconsciously taking their social skills into account when playing the NPC roles, so there was no roll necessary. Others may disgaree.

Of course, this begs the question: how do you as DM learn to do this? The easiest way has to be to play under a DM who already knows it naturally. If you can get the chance to watch other DMs at work, it can serve as a useful guide of what to do andwhat not to do! But I also think that a really valuable method is to watch good drama: on TV, cinema and at the theatre. Watch how good actors react to situations: body language and intonation. Look at how writes create dramatic situations, and have the characters interact. Historical drama, when well done, includes a wealth of information about the etiquette of social interaction in more stratified societies. And even when it's not well done, it might get your players to appreciate that you don't address the Queen as 'Babe!' (at least not outside her private chambers! ).

Like all skills, it takes time to get good at societal construction and representation. But getting good at it makes the game feel so much more 'real'.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

Inez! Where did you get that quote? Is it from Summoner Geeks 2?

 

[Fenes 2]

I am one of those DMs that often have sessions where not a single combat took place, or if a combat took place it was not a challenge, but just a formality resolved in a couple attack rolls.

Often my PCs have to navigate the social circuit, gathering information from the nobles and the dregs of the town. I usually reoslve this with a roleplaying scene followed by the die roll with appropriate modifiers. I am not of the opinion that good player knowledge and ability makes up for lacking pc skills - that dwarven barbarian has to make that diplomacy roll, despite the player knowing exactly how to treat the half-elven duchess - and I also do not let a player fail a check just because he had no idea how to act in a feudal society despite playing a knight with diplomacy +10 and knowledge royality and nobility +8.

Contrary to others I also feel it helps to supply the information neccessary, as long as the player has some idea what to do. F.e., if a player "wants to talk shop" with a merchant, I would let him know, perhaps after an intelligence, knowledge or gather information check, what was happening in the trade business, leaving it up to the player how to use that information in dealing with the merchant.

It also helps if you let the players state their intentions and mannerisms in an abstract way followed by a diplomacy or other skill check instead of requiring that they detail how the act. F.e. if a player says "I bow gracefully and address the duke with the utmost deference" and rolls well on his diplomacy check I supply the details, how he bows with one hand in front of his chest and the other flourishing an imaginary hat after the southern fashion.

If you use that kind of system the player pick up the information and clues in game, and they have an incentive to take the appropriate skills for their PCs. After a whle they know enough to describe their actions themselves.

Another inventive is to curb the desire to gather loot in combat. If you can win a piece of land or a monopoly in trade, both representing veritable fortunes, by gaining influence in court you are less likely to press for some more dungeons to crawl through.
As important is to let the players earn exp in social situations, if they care about exp. If you either classify each social interaction as an ecounter, dishing out exps for overcoming it, or if you set story awards for social encounters, make sure that you make at least as much exp in social interaction as in combat, again if your players care about that.
(My group does not use exp anymore, we just level up when we see fit to, so we have no pressure "to make some exp close to levelling".)

Currently my PCs are trying to convince a collection of merchants and nobles in a coaltion to free an invaded city. In order to do that they have to influence the different NPCs. They can impress them, blackmail them, sweet-talk them, bribe them, all within the session. Each of the NPCs has a different agenda, but it is not required to convince everyone - some will go with the flow when other key figures are convinced.
To add some difficulties to the situation, one PC is replacing a missing noble, and is now faced with an impending arranged marriage to an influental (and violent) family and his double's lover, the daughter of a powerful and protective duke, who wants to elope with him (or daddy will hear about the affair...). The PCs decided to let the elven archer court the would-be eloper, and to stall for time with the engagement until after the agreement is secured while looking for an acceptable commander for the allied force, which will require some behind the scenes negotiation and consequently information gathering.

As a more standard challenge at the same time the party has to dea with the social situation a couple of assassins are on the lose, trying to kill the party or the nobles or the merchants and members of a local church have been missing in the woods.

 

[mmadsen]

I find it interesting that no example of play shows up until you get to page 130 of the DM's Guide -- and, of course, it's a dungeon crawl, illustrating how the sample dungeon might play out with four iconic characters exploring it.

First, I'm a bit surprised that the example of play isn't on page 1 of the Player's Handbook -- wouldn't it make the most sense there? -- and, second, while I'm not the least bit surprised that the example of play is a dungeon crawl, I am disappointed that there's no example of play in the wilderness or in a social setting.

I understand the "back to the dungeon" movement, and I recognize that dungeons are both easy-to-run and fun, but wilderness and social adventures are fun too -- and, if they're not as easy to run, isn't that a good reason to give more hints and examples of how to pull it off?

 

[sword-dancer]

Hello SHARK

I don`t think it is necessary for players to know the exact title of the King or duke but to roleplay well the respect for the authority of the office if not for the holder.(at the best of his abilities or his characters liking)
This goes for the nobility and clergy.
But this goes also in the other side a PC_ who is a member of the clergy, nobility, order or an acknowledged pally can expect to be given the due respect.
OTOH IMC nobility and parts of the clergy have no problems to enforce the authority and behaviour of their rank.
This could go a bit up and down depending on society and oether reasons.
But i would be very careful with an roleplaying guide to play the classes, this could end like dark eye 2/3 Edition were they go down to arms and armor, behaviour and so on.
"A t roleright played warrior wouldn`t do this" normaly followed in the adventures with more EXP for what they called roleright played Clones than anything else.
What let me found in the adventure series to save the world to the following point
"if the you have a priest of this goddess and he didn`t give or made the promise to give a large offering to this temple after he founds this info(this game made a sience out, how to hold the PCs poor and without influence) he is played by a bad roleplayer, what let me to the thought how bad must a roleplayer *be who played a goddess whoe enforced large financial offering when the priest tries to save the world from her twelfth damend grandchild"

as GM you should give your Players a oversea how the society works, and give them the information the PCs know of the local area.
The rest you should made with the character creation, to be clear you all work on the same line.
And let the NPC react not at rolls ,but on playing.

I don`t be to found of rolls when it comes to interaction, the skill of the P_C is more to show me how much and good the player should play these things.
I would say that it is better to roll if the player can`t backup this perfect etiquette by an correspnding skill or if he isn`t able to back up his skill with the correspnding roleplay.

And since such things as interacting with NPC often have a reason and therefore a challenge it is not less EXP worthy than slying 837 Dragon, maybe more.
E.g. The recon mission ends with the information you give, not with coming back from the field, if you mess this up, all other was for naught.
Or to made the baron change his decision how to act with the refugees, or to give the clergy the land to build their Temple or....


*not to mind a professional adventure writer?