Raven Crowking
First Post
DonTadow said:
Indeed it is.
The need for social skills in D&D
- Thread starter replicant2
- Start date
Indeed it is.
Raven Crowking said:Dynasties & Demagogues is pretty good. I like the Maze of Bureaucracy trap.
Second to that. Have to say that don't know about that burning wheel. Could be worth of buying.
And what goes to that hacn&slash - D&D has clear rules for fight and the basic idea is to kill&loot. It can be played as a diplomatic game and I do like that too.
The Human Target
Adventurer
If someone wants to tell the group how they're intimidating someone, I'm super happy.
If they don't, I narrate what happens.
The same way I let someone explain the flurry of saber cuts they're making against a goblin if they want to, and if not narrate what happens.
Its pretty simple to me.
If they don't, I narrate what happens.
The same way I let someone explain the flurry of saber cuts they're making against a goblin if they want to, and if not narrate what happens.
Its pretty simple to me.
tzor
First Post
After slogging through 5 pages of interesting discussion I still have one interesting question that I don’t think has been adequately addressed. Why are social skills different from combat?
As I read the discussion I get the impression that many people treat social skill rolling in the same manner many used to treat combat in 2E – I roll … do I hit? No tactics, no role play, just roll play. No wonder they are opposed to it.
So looking at combat because I think we can come into easy agreement in this area, I think it is easy to see that there are three elements to combat; tactics, the adjudicating dice, and finally the role play. Now not everyone is an expert in D&D combat tactics, but in general most people try to have their characters avoid obvious attacks of opportunity, give them options to flank opponents and keep others from doing it to them and so forth. Still all the best tactics in the world still require the necessary dice rolls to see how successful they are. Finally until you know you are going to hit or not you don’t think about describing it, and if you make a mistake describing it, everyone laughs and moves on.
If we look at combat tactics, we see all sorts of modifiers depending on the tactic and the conditions surrounding the situation. Generally these are all spelt out but they are also a part of common sense. Depending on the situation we can also get into the notion of the “collective” player where players can OOC give friendly combat tips to other players when they think the character would have such appropriate knowledge.
So, why is this any different from social skills? Role playing social skills should come through tactics, mediated through the dice embellished by grand fluff.
“I approach the bar maid and attempt to gather information … ugh, that’s not a good roll, ‘hey lady, is your ale as full bodied as you are?’” (Obviously I need better tactics than that!)
As I read the discussion I get the impression that many people treat social skill rolling in the same manner many used to treat combat in 2E – I roll … do I hit? No tactics, no role play, just roll play. No wonder they are opposed to it.
So looking at combat because I think we can come into easy agreement in this area, I think it is easy to see that there are three elements to combat; tactics, the adjudicating dice, and finally the role play. Now not everyone is an expert in D&D combat tactics, but in general most people try to have their characters avoid obvious attacks of opportunity, give them options to flank opponents and keep others from doing it to them and so forth. Still all the best tactics in the world still require the necessary dice rolls to see how successful they are. Finally until you know you are going to hit or not you don’t think about describing it, and if you make a mistake describing it, everyone laughs and moves on.
If we look at combat tactics, we see all sorts of modifiers depending on the tactic and the conditions surrounding the situation. Generally these are all spelt out but they are also a part of common sense. Depending on the situation we can also get into the notion of the “collective” player where players can OOC give friendly combat tips to other players when they think the character would have such appropriate knowledge.
So, why is this any different from social skills? Role playing social skills should come through tactics, mediated through the dice embellished by grand fluff.
“I approach the bar maid and attempt to gather information … ugh, that’s not a good roll, ‘hey lady, is your ale as full bodied as you are?’” (Obviously I need better tactics than that!)
buzz
Adventurer
This is kind of what the Duel of Wits rules from Burning Wheel are all about. If fact, they are essentially structured just like the rules for Fight! (i.e., combat).tzor said:
For those interested, you can download the DoW rules (.pdf, 270 KB).
hamishspence
Adventurer
Skill of player vs skill of character
Some people are good at roleplaying social. Some are not. the rules mechanic should be used to ensure that shy players are not penalized for playing, and verbose, actor-style players do not get everything their own way.
How this is to be done right is the DM's discretion. Most DM's don't want pure mechanic, but the mechanic is there to make it clear what can and can't be done. eg a guy with low charisma and no bluff CANNOT deceive a NPC with maxed out Sense Motive and high stats.
The Balance between roleplay and mechanic is up to DM and players to strike a fun spot: not to far in either direction.
Some people are good at roleplaying social. Some are not. the rules mechanic should be used to ensure that shy players are not penalized for playing, and verbose, actor-style players do not get everything their own way.
How this is to be done right is the DM's discretion. Most DM's don't want pure mechanic, but the mechanic is there to make it clear what can and can't be done. eg a guy with low charisma and no bluff CANNOT deceive a NPC with maxed out Sense Motive and high stats.
The Balance between roleplay and mechanic is up to DM and players to strike a fun spot: not to far in either direction.
buzz said:
Sounds similar to Classic Traveller descriptions of how to use various social skills, Carousing vs. Diplomacy vs. Steward vs. Administration vs. Bribery etc. There is even a classic Traveller adventure from the Dragon, "Stranded on Arden", I think, that was all about which social skill you used to work through a chain of authority to get an exit visa, all before the fleet arrives and commandeers your ship.
Basically state intent, how your going to do it (what skill applies), roll on a reaction table with modifiers based on approach choosen and DM modifier for "role-playing," break interaction up into discrete bits so all does not rest on one roll. You could even assign task points based on goal, good rolls whittled away at them, bad rolls added to them.
IIRC Top Secret also had a similar approach with respect to information gathering and interrogation.
I always liked such approaches as there is player skill and choice in what to ask for and how to try to got about it but you don't need to be an actor or speak in character.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
