Social Encounters: help needed?

[dave2008]

Other than that, not sure what you're looking for...?

Thanks for the reply, I clarified my thoughts more in the thread: #3 , #6, & #8

 

[CapnZapp]

I just got the impression that there are rules/guidelines based on the class descriptions. All the other areas: combat, exploration, and downtime have specific rules / guidelines that it seems odd that there wouldn't be any for social encounters. I also thought I saw @Campbell talking about them at one point. Maybe I was wrong and they are not there.

What other mechanism than NPC attitudes and how to shift them did you expect to find?

Not sure if the following is relevant, but the body of rules in D&D has always been 85% combat 10% explore 5% social - give or take. (That is not three equal pillars)

 

[dave2008]

What other mechanism than NPC attitudes and how to shift them did you expect to find?

From my posts above:
"That was helpful, similar to 4e, but with less structure. I'm still interested in adding something similar to the Exploration "Activities," but for social encounters and then maybe making a chart of the hostile, unfriendly, indifferent, friendly, and helpful scale of success."

So I thought there might be some social "actions" that provide modifiers or similar adjustments to social encounters along the hostility scale. Similar to what they provided for the Exploration phase.

Similarly, a 3PP product for 5e came up with what they call "Social Combat," so I thought PF2e might have something like that.

Not sure if the following is relevant, but the body of rules in D&D has always been 85% combat 10% explore 5% social - give or take. (That is not three equal pillars)

Not really relevant for what I am asking, but in terms of playing time we spend a lot more time in social and explore than what the quantity of rules might suggest. Now, I realize you don't need as much rules for the other areas, but more support is welcome IMO.

 

[CapnZapp]

There are, as I said, a sprinkling of attitude mentions in various chapters, including feats that lets you use other skills than Diplomacy, or feats that lets you modify the standard change-attitude outcomes of the main Make an Impression action.

And the game is certainly geared up for providing more specialized feats.

If you hoped for something new, something more... involved..? then, no.

 

[dave2008]

There are, as I said, a sprinkling of attitude mentions in various chapters, including feats that lets you use other skills than Diplomacy, or feats that lets you modify the standard change-attitude outcomes of the

Yep, the help you and others have provided is much appreciated, I was just looking for something different.

When I get some free time a I might make my own guidelines and pit all this info in one place and add some larger framer work for social encounters. I have been interested in doing something like this for a long time and got reinvigorated with PF2e's exploration activities. I think combining that concept with the Fate-of-the-Norns Social Combat concept might make for interesting social encounter activities.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Sorry for not this, but I've been trying to find the rules or guidelines for social encounters in PF2e, but I haven't had much success. I see each class as a combat encounter, social encounter, exploration, and downtime suggestion. I can find the rules for the other four, but I can't seem to find them for social encounters. Can someone point me in the right direction for the SRD or corerulebook? Thank you!

I don't know if a class-based social encounter makes sense in non-metagame terms; it's too reliant on backgrounds. I picture a peasant who became a mercenary (and is a member of the fighter class) is quite different socially than a noble-born knight (a member of the fighter class) even though they are both fighters.

 

[dave2008]

I don't know if a class-based social encounter makes sense in non-metagame terms; it's too reliant on backgrounds. I picture a peasant who became a mercenary (and is a member of the fighter class) is quite different socially than a noble-born knight (a member of the fighter class) even though they are both fighters.

Why would it have to be class based? Or what do you mean by class based?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Why would it have to be class based? Or what do you mean by class based?

I am responding to this:

I see each class as a combat encounter, social encounter, exploration, and downtime suggestion.

I generally don't see each class having a specific contribution to social encounters. That's more about the character's personality, background, and even skillset.

 

[dave2008]

I am responding to this:



I generally don't see each class having a specific contribution to social encounters. That's more about the character's personality, background, and even skillset.

OK, I see what your saying. I wasn't trying to suggest the system has to be classed based. I was just referencing how in PF2e each class gives a description of what your class does in combat, exploration, social, and downtime modes, which is what made me think there would be rules for exploration like the rest of those areas. It looks like this for the Fighter (and is just a description of your role in each encounter, not the rules I was talking about which are located in "Running Modes of Play" in the GM section):

 

[CapnZapp]

Ah.

Okay, I see your point.

I would say the social and explore descriptions are mostly just a successful attempt by the writer to hide the fact that class isn't contributing anything special