D&D General Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?

[Reynard]

Opposite to that is the social pillar. Speaking in character at the table is the most natural thing to do. Human brains are usually wired to be able to.follow conservations. The speech is not abstract, the interactions between NPCs and PCs can flow naturally and normally without overwhelming anybody, because we are usually used to that kind of interaction.
The social pillar of the game is the least abstract part of the game and that's why it needs the least set of rules and mechanics ...

"Social combat" is not intended for every conversation you might have with NPCs. It is for trying to win a court case, or convince a resistant king to help you, or beseech the aid of a dragon, or whatever. it is there for those times when you want clear objectives and outcomes.

And here's the thing: you still have the talking in funny voices part, as much or as little as you do that regularly in the game. if you are using the Influence system linked above, you still have to engage with the scenario and NPCs in order to employ the skill checks and stuff.

 

[M_Natas]

I see the 5e RAW as more discretionary for DM procedure and approach.

Page 236:

"Dice are neutral arbiters. They can determine the outcome of an action without assigning any motivation to the DM and without playing favorites. The extent to which you use them is entirely up to you."

"One approach is to use dice as rarely as possible. Some DMs use them only during combat, and determine success or failure as they like in other situations. With this approach, the DM decides whether an action or a plan succeeds or fails based on how well the players make their case, how thorough or creative they are, or other factors."

Page 244:

"Some DMs prefer to run a social interaction as a free-form roleplaying exercise, where dice rarely come into play. Other DMs prefer to resolve the outcome of an interaction by having characters make Charisma checks. Either approach works, and most games fall somewhere in between, balancing player skill (roleplaying and persuading) with character skill (reflected by ability checks)."

Okay, that is fair.
But I have never seen or played in a game where the DM didn't use skill checks social encounters.
But you are right, RAW can be both: total free form or how I explained it.

 

[Reynard]

I think one might still be able to interlace this with natural conversation somewhat, but it seems too crunchy to me and would get in the way. It is also telling that nothing in these rules actually tell us how this is roleplayed. Based on these rules one could imagine that people just each declare "I make an influence action on the Duke" etc.

People do that regardless. "I roll persuasion on the guard" is something you hear all the time. I mean, people roleplay with and around the game rules everywhere else. The social pillar is not special in that regard, IMO.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

People do that regardless. "I roll persuasion on the guard" is something you hear all the time.

No I don't. Like basically never. The only time where thing like this happened was in Exalted 2e, where the social combat rules allowed socially focused characters to convince NPCs about utterly absurd things, so some players gave up on trying to roleplay it as no one could even imagine how such a thing could occur. But normally people just say what their character would say.

I mean, people roleplay with and around the game rules everywhere else. The social pillar is not special in that regard, IMO.

I think social pillar is special. I think here we are at the heart of roleplaying, directly expressing your character.

 

[Reynard]

No I don't. Like basically never. The only time where thing like this happened was in Exalted 2e, where the social combat rules allowed socially focused characters to convince NPCs about utterly absurd things, so some players gave up on trying to roleplay it as no one could even imagine how such a thing could occur. But normally people just say what their character would say.

Your experience is different than mine.

I think social pillar is special. I think here we are at the heart of roleplaying, directly expressing your character.

I like it when people roleplay when in combat and exploring, too. I also like it that there are mechanics around those things that I can translate the roleplaying into.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Your experience is different than mine.

I guess I've been lucky. Also, like I said earlier, my tabletop RPG circles overlap with LARP circles quite a bit, so that probably influences how people approach things. In a LARP you obviously must speak in-character all the time.

I like it when people roleplay when in combat and exploring, too. I also like it that there are mechanics around those things that I can translate the roleplaying into.

You of course can roleplay in other situations too. But in a conversation you're doing in real time what your character is doing, rather than just describing what your character is doing and being interrupted by constant consultation of mechanics and time dilation. It is basically the only part of tabletop RPG that can work like in a LARP, with pure real time character inhabitation and expression.

 

[I'm A Banana]

So I'm more in the camp of "not more rules" for the social pillar of the game.

But can somebody give me concrete examples of more rules for the social pillar?
How do those mechanics would look like and how do they change (and improve) the gameplay?

Because right now I can't think off any one mechanic that I think would improve the game, but maybe I just don't see it yet.

Here's an idea of what I think would make a good social mechanic addition to 5e:

Wants and Needs
When you've got a recurring NPC, one helpful dimension to define for them are their wants and their needs.

An NPC's wants define their current goals and what they're actively pursuing. NPC's are usually pretty vocal about their wants, and don't hide this intel from others in normal circumstances. An NPC's wants could be anything they hope to achieve - an orc warlord who wants to crush the kingdom, a king who wants to raise an army, a barkeep who wants coin, a dog who wants a belly-rub, a polymorphed dragon who is looking for some adventurers to retrieve a lost scepter from her hoard. You can define an NPC's wants as specific or as broad as you like, but defining it - writing it down next to their stat block, for instance - can help guide the actions they take.

An NPC's needs define some deeper trait that explores why they're pursuing what they're pursuing. NPC's are often less open about their wants, and might not even be consciously aware of them. They are typically related to feelings and relationships the NPC might have. Example NPC needs include an orc warlord who needs to be seen as a champion of his people, a king who needs to feel like a true leader in the eyes of a judgmental advisor, a barkeep who needs to pay the hefty taxes on her establishment, a dog who needs companionship, or a polymorphed dragon who needs to feel safe. Similar to a want, these can be broad or specific, but the definition can help you judge when the NPC might change their mind about a want. For instance, maybe you can broker peace between the orc warlord and the king by convincing both of them to forge a peace that will last through the ages, increasing the power of both of their peoples and getting bards to sing their legends for generations.

Because needs are often hidden and powerful ways to influence an NPC, player characters aren't usually aware of them on simple interaction. It takes some effort to discover an NPC's needs. Usually, this means asking some questions about the NPC's life or about what they value. An NPC who is actively hiding their needs might require the party to make a group Wisdom (Insight) check to discover them, opposed by that NPC's Charisma (Deception) check.

Once a PC knows an NPC's need, they can use that info to craft a more persuasive argument. If the party is rolling a Charisma check to persuade the NPC of some course of action, invoking that NPC's need could grant advantage on the check.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Here's an idea of what I think would make a good social mechanic addition to 5e:

Wants and Needs
When you've got a recurring NPC, one helpful dimension to define for them are their wants and their needs.

An NPC's wants define their current goals and what they're actively pursuing. NPC's are usually pretty vocal about their wants, and don't hide this intel from others in normal circumstances. An NPC's wants could be anything they hope to achieve - an orc warlord who wants to crush the kingdom, a king who wants to raise an army, a barkeep who wants coin, a dog who wants a belly-rub, a polymorphed dragon who is looking for some adventurers to retrieve a lost scepter from her hoard. You can define an NPC's wants as specific or as broad as you like, but defining it - writing it down next to their stat block, for instance - can help guide the actions they take.

An NPC's needs define some deeper trait that explores why they're pursuing what they're pursuing. NPC's are often less open about their wants, and might not even be consciously aware of them. They are typically related to feelings and relationships the NPC might have. Example NPC needs include an orc warlord who needs to be seen as a champion of his people, a king who needs to feel like a true leader in the eyes of a judgmental advisor, a barkeep who needs to pay the hefty taxes on her establishment, a dog who needs companionship, or a polymorphed dragon who needs to feel safe. Similar to a want, these can be broad or specific, but the definition can help you judge when the NPC might change their mind about a want. For instance, maybe you can broker peace between the orc warlord and the king by convincing both of them to forge a peace that will last through the ages, increasing the power of both of their peoples and getting bards to sing their legends for generations.

Because needs are often hidden and powerful ways to influence an NPC, player characters aren't usually aware of them on simple interaction. It takes some effort to discover an NPC's needs. Usually, this means asking some questions about the NPC's life or about what they value. An NPC who is actively hiding their needs might require the party to make a group Wisdom (Insight) check to discover them, opposed by that NPC's Charisma (Deception) check.

Once a PC knows an NPC's need, they can use that info to craft a more persuasive argument. If the party is rolling a Charisma check to persuade the NPC of some course of action, invoking that NPC's need could grant advantage on the check.

Yes, this is basically what I do, it just isn't that formal.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yep! A lot of the "mechanics" I'd add are basically scaffolding that help normal DMs get to the place that good DMs get to intuitively.

 

[M_Natas]

Here's an idea of what I think would make a good social mechanic addition to 5e:

Wants and Needs
When you've got a recurring NPC, one helpful dimension to define for them are their wants and their needs.

An NPC's wants define their current goals and what they're actively pursuing. NPC's are usually pretty vocal about their wants, and don't hide this intel from others in normal circumstances. An NPC's wants could be anything they hope to achieve - an orc warlord who wants to crush the kingdom, a king who wants to raise an army, a barkeep who wants coin, a dog who wants a belly-rub, a polymorphed dragon who is looking for some adventurers to retrieve a lost scepter from her hoard. You can define an NPC's wants as specific or as broad as you like, but defining it - writing it down next to their stat block, for instance - can help guide the actions they take.

An NPC's needs define some deeper trait that explores why they're pursuing what they're pursuing. NPC's are often less open about their wants, and might not even be consciously aware of them. They are typically related to feelings and relationships the NPC might have. Example NPC needs include an orc warlord who needs to be seen as a champion of his people, a king who needs to feel like a true leader in the eyes of a judgmental advisor, a barkeep who needs to pay the hefty taxes on her establishment, a dog who needs companionship, or a polymorphed dragon who needs to feel safe. Similar to a want, these can be broad or specific, but the definition can help you judge when the NPC might change their mind about a want. For instance, maybe you can broker peace between the orc warlord and the king by convincing both of them to forge a peace that will last through the ages, increasing the power of both of their peoples and getting bards to sing their legends for generations.

Because needs are often hidden and powerful ways to influence an NPC, player characters aren't usually aware of them on simple interaction. It takes some effort to discover an NPC's needs. Usually, this means asking some questions about the NPC's life or about what they value. An NPC who is actively hiding their needs might require the party to make a group Wisdom (Insight) check to discover them, opposed by that NPC's Charisma (Deception) check.

Once a PC knows an NPC's need, they can use that info to craft a more persuasive argument. If the party is rolling a Charisma check to persuade the NPC of some course of action, invoking that NPC's need could grant advantage on the check.

Okay, that is totally fine. But that barley counts as an additional mechanic, to me. Like, it is a formalised way to make NPCs a little bit deeper.
There is a big difference from this and the social combat others talk about.