Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ondath" data-source="post: 9288040" data-attributes="member: 7031770"><p>My approach to social mechanics has a similar basis regardless of the system I'm playing, but I do modify it slightly. It takes the Reaction Roll as a basis, which I think was a really ingenious invention that modern D&D lost: A bell curve to determine the general disposition the opposing side will have in the beginning. If the disposition would be clearly determined by something else, I of course don't roll. But otherwise the Reaction Roll helps me simulate the idea that the NPC has their inner world and approach to the party.</p><p></p><p>Then if I'm running an Old-School game, I try to judge a social encounter depending on the player's approach and intent. I wouldn't make a dice roll at all, if possible, and just play the scene naturally. The player can just describe their approach and intent and that should be about it.</p><p></p><p>But if I'm running a modern game where there are socially-relevant mechanics (and as a result, some players might specialise in those and expect those mechanics to be relevant), I'll use those. Whether you get what you want in a negotiation might still be determined by a Persuasion roll in the end, but I'll try to colour the DC depending on your character's approach and intent. I also try to make sure everyone can contribute. Stats other than Charisma can be used, or you might just talk to discover stuff about the NPC and help the high-Charisma person that way.</p><p></p><p>All in all, I try to strike a balance between not forcing people to speak exactly like their character would, and just rolling the dice and be done with it. Unlike bending bars, talking <em>is</em> something we can do at the table, and at least my players feel weird when their characters resolve a social encounter with too many mechanics. It feels unnatural to them. At the same time, I want to make sure that even the most socially awkward person can play a persuasive smooth talker and be a credit to their team. So intent + approach method is usually sufficient.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ondath, post: 9288040, member: 7031770"] My approach to social mechanics has a similar basis regardless of the system I'm playing, but I do modify it slightly. It takes the Reaction Roll as a basis, which I think was a really ingenious invention that modern D&D lost: A bell curve to determine the general disposition the opposing side will have in the beginning. If the disposition would be clearly determined by something else, I of course don't roll. But otherwise the Reaction Roll helps me simulate the idea that the NPC has their inner world and approach to the party. Then if I'm running an Old-School game, I try to judge a social encounter depending on the player's approach and intent. I wouldn't make a dice roll at all, if possible, and just play the scene naturally. The player can just describe their approach and intent and that should be about it. But if I'm running a modern game where there are socially-relevant mechanics (and as a result, some players might specialise in those and expect those mechanics to be relevant), I'll use those. Whether you get what you want in a negotiation might still be determined by a Persuasion roll in the end, but I'll try to colour the DC depending on your character's approach and intent. I also try to make sure everyone can contribute. Stats other than Charisma can be used, or you might just talk to discover stuff about the NPC and help the high-Charisma person that way. All in all, I try to strike a balance between not forcing people to speak exactly like their character would, and just rolling the dice and be done with it. Unlike bending bars, talking [I]is[/I] something we can do at the table, and at least my players feel weird when their characters resolve a social encounter with too many mechanics. It feels unnatural to them. At the same time, I want to make sure that even the most socially awkward person can play a persuasive smooth talker and be a credit to their team. So intent + approach method is usually sufficient. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?
Top