D&D General On Social Mechanics of Various Sorts

[iserith]

I'm a big fan of this approach, so kudos from me to you. It's hard, because it's very easy to think you should reward the rich descriptions, entertaining performances, etc. On the one hand, doing so could motivate the less socially gregarious types to up their game, but I also don't want to create a situation where only very socially gregarious, confident people are welcome at the table.

I think the reward for that kind of behavior is Inspiration, but only if they're playing to an established personality trait, ideal, bond, or flaw. Goal and approach is all that is needed to adjudicate and flowery language isn't needed for that as long as the player is getting the point across to the DM.

 

[Reynard]

I think the reward for that kind of behavior is Inspiration, but only if they're playing to an established personality trait, ideal, bond, or flaw. Goal and approach is all that is needed to adjudicate and flowery language isn't needed for that as long as the player is getting the point across to the DM.

I have actually backed of a focus on goal and approach after a few years of favoring it. I found that it was pulling me as GM and my players out of the game.

 

[iserith]

I have actually backed of a focus on goal and approach after a few years of favoring it. I found that it was pulling me as GM and my players out of the game.

I'm not sure I see how since that's what an action declaration is when you break it down. "I want to do X to accomplish Y" in so many words.

 

[Reynard]

I'm not sure I see how since that's what an action declaration is when you break it down. "I want to do X to accomplish Y" in so many words.

It breaks immediacy when you focus too much on the final goal I have found. I have gone back to "What do you do?" as the basic question. It is immediate, and in reality what the ultimate goal is shouldn't matter from a mechanical standpoint -- only what the PC is attempting at that time. It doesn't matter whether the PC wants to kiss the prince sleeping in his chambers, or slit his throat. "I sneak past the guard," is all that matters at this moment.

 

[iserith]

It breaks immediacy when you focus too much on the final goal I have found. I have gone back to "What do you do?" as the basic question. It is immediate, and in reality what the ultimate goal is shouldn't matter from a mechanical standpoint -- only what the PC is attempting at that time. It doesn't matter whether the PC wants to kiss the prince sleeping in his chambers, or slit his throat. "I sneak past the guard," is all that matters at this moment.

It looks like you're thinking what I mean by "goal and approach" is something else entirely. "I sneak past the guard" is a fine action declaration, given a shared understanding of the context.

 

[billd91]

It breaks immediacy when you focus too much on the final goal I have found. I have gone back to "What do you do?" as the basic question. It is immediate, and in reality what the ultimate goal is shouldn't matter from a mechanical standpoint -- only what the PC is attempting at that time. It doesn't matter whether the PC wants to kiss the prince sleeping in his chambers, or slit his throat. "I sneak past the guard," is all that matters at this moment.

Maybe you're analyzing a goal too far out. Sneaking past the guard to kiss/assassinate the prince isn't what iserith is talking about. It's more like sneaking past the guard is the goal and the action is shuffling along the wall behind the tapestry.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm a big fan of this approach, so kudos from me to you. It's hard, because it's very easy to think you should reward the rich descriptions, entertaining performances, etc. On the one hand, doing so could motivate the less socially gregarious types to up their game, but I also don't want to create a situation where only very socially gregarious, confident people are welcome at the table.

I do reward excellent roleplay skills ... with Inspiration.

But the for skill checks, it depends on whether the effort sounds like a good idea that should work or not. An idea that sounds like it should work without a skill check, automatically succeeds. A bad idea automatically fails without a check.

 

[Reynard]

Maybe you're analyzing a goal too far out. Sneaking past the guard to kiss/assassinate the prince isn't what iserith is talking about. It's more like sneaking past the guard is the goal and the action is shuffling along the wall behind the tapestry.

I was being hyperbolic for effect. The point is I found it immersion breaking to step out of the immediacy of the scene to discuss the goal and approach implementation. It's unnecessary because the end result -- the action the PC takes -- is the same, so it is better, I found, to stay in the moment.
"You see a guard up on the balcony above. He seems to be on watch, but bored."
"Okay, I'll wait for an opportune time and then sneak as quickly and quietly as possible across the courtyard until I am out of sight."
I got to the point where that is all I need. The player and I both are still in the scene, talking about it "in character." That's all.

This is of course a tangent (that I started. oop), so maybe if @iserith or you want to keep discussing it someone can start another thread to which I will happily contribute my thoughts.

 

[Yaarel]

I just picked up a copy of Legendary games Ultimate Kingdoms book, and I was reading through the Relationships chapter last night as it is relative to my next campaign (the PCs are going to be crew members of a large "Planejammer" sailing the Astral Sea and they will have to make friends, rivals and enemies among the rest of the crew). It is an interesting system where PCs will earn ranks of friendship with NPCs by a series of individual "challenges" with that NPC --- usually by engaging them on a subject, doing something for them, or giving them a gift, followed by one or more skill checks. I gather from reading it that the system was initially designed for 3.5 or Pathfinder and adapted to 5E, but it seems to work on paper pretty well, with detailed writeups of the example NPCs to show you how to make use of the system in your own games.

Anyway, it got me thinking of social mechanics that can be found in various versions of D&D throughout the years, from reaction rolls to the Leadership Feat, along with the usual Persuasion and Deception checks.

How do you use social mechanics in your D&D games? If the scale of "how much do you rely on social mechanics" is from 0 (never roll; just role-play) to 10 (role-play doesn't impact the DC; just roll), where do your preferences sit on that scale? Does it change from campaign to campaign, adventure to adventure, or even between players?

Thanks.

Heh, at this point, I am just grateful to even have a section of the character sheet with "Bonds".

For Bonds, I feel it is important to distinguish between persons, places, and things. It might be, the place like childhood home relates to persons, like parents. A thing might be a sentimental heirloom. But the relationship to each is different.



Thinking out loud, it is probably ok to gain ones proficiency bonus for any skill checks relating to a Bond. Skills that relate to or test ones bonded relationship are heightened.

There could be other kinds of doable mechanics too.

 

[iserith]

I was being hyperbolic for effect. The point is I found it immersion breaking to step out of the immediacy of the scene to discuss the goal and approach implementation. It's unnecessary because the end result -- the action the PC takes -- is the same, so it is better, I found, to stay in the moment.
"You see a guard up on the balcony above. He seems to be on watch, but bored."
"Okay, I'll wait for an opportune time and then sneak as quickly and quietly as possible across the courtyard until I am out of sight."
I got to the point where that is all I need. The player and I both are still in the scene, talking about it "in character." That's all.

"Okay, I'll wait for an opportune time (approach) and then sneak as quickly and quietly as possible (approach) across the courtyard until I am out of sight (goal)."

Truly baffled by what you think was meant by "goal and approach." It's simply saying enough for the DM to adjudicate without making a lot of unnecessary assumptions about what the character is doing and trying to accomplish. Here, given the context, it seems like the player's goal is to avoid detection by the guard to while traversing the courtyard with the approach of moving quickly and quietly at an opportune time. Goal. Approach.

I don't think it's necessary to start a new thread on this tangent, but I'll leave it there.