Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catastrophic" data-source="post: 5641916" data-attributes="member: 81381">Interesting idea, but can we trade off between subtypes without making restrictive conceptual assumptions? I'l try this with social skills; bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate. And i'll try and keep the mechanics relatively simple, rather than assuming everything is social combat. . and athletic combat. . and academic combat, ect. Below, i'm just trying a simple premise and seeing how it fits.  INTIMIDATE: +3 power, -3 complexity. You can achieve simple persuasion goals very easily with intimidate, but it works less well when things get complex/or if there are multiple stages to a task. Intimidate is a way to convince people to do something simple, and immediate. Don't expect them to follow complex instructions. BLUFF: -3 Power, +3 Treachery. Lies work best when they're out of the spotlight, but they can be effective at getting people to work against their own interests, or those of those who control them. You can scare a guard into giving you their key. . sure. . .or appeal to their better nature, but it's a lot easier to tell them you work for their boss, or that you forgot your key today. Bluff is a way to convince people to do things they would not do if they knew the truth. DIPLOMACY: -3 Treachery, +3 Complexity. Diplomacy is about people working together, often on complex issues. You can't persuade people to damage themselves, but you can persuade them to help you, and in doing so, help themselves. And, unlike more dramatic or deceitful methods, you can manage complex issues that could easiily break down under the weight of intimidation or lies.  PERSUASION/BARGAINING: No modifiers. A flat method of getting your way, without any particular strengths or weaknesses.</blockquote>

Verification