D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Bill Zebub]

I'd say that 5e has rather robust rules for how these skills apply to NPCs. People seem to just ignore them, though. It's weird.

Such as?

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

I agree with you about all of that...

...AND if somebody says, "Is there any way I can persuade you we should keep the McGuffin rather than return it?" And the other player says, "Tell you what, if you roll Cha (Persuasion) and get 30+ and I'll do it...."

I see nothing wrong with that, and wouldn't call that PvP.

The mechanic you just described is really a situation where the target (PC or NPC) is saying "look, I made a savings throw, or contested ability check (like a Grapple) and this is the number you now have to beat on your roll". Now, if another player asked me the question you have posed, I would say, every time, "The DC is 1000." And that is PvP.

There is a player in the one group I am playing in that he and I have serious issues with one another (real surprise). He is indeed playing that Bard. He first tried to cast Suggestion (being a bad player he did not realize that Elves make Charm saves at Advantage) on my char for my char to give up my magic sword which he told the group he was going to then toss down a pit 3300 feet deep. Since then, he has tried Persuasion on me (+10 at 5th level) to do stuff I am adamant that my char would not do. But he keeps rolling high and the DM says "yeah, your char will allow the Bard to hug you", or "yeah, you agree with the Bard that stealing from a powerful NPC is OK".

Now, this as much on the DM as the player. The DM could say "this is PvP, and not allowed", but instead, said "PvP is discouraged". In the case of that hug situation, I had already stated that the Bard was going to end up with a dagger in his throat if he had not made his DC roll set by the DM (as I said, this was a case where the target has no agency, but I would be a hypocrite to use that defence, since I don't believe in "player agency")

 

[Voadam]

Such as?

Well there is DMG page 244-245 expanding on social interactions with some more suggestions including the NPC three attitude framing (friendly, indifferent, hostile) and a conversation reaction chart with entries like "The creature accepts a significant risk or sacrifice to do as asked." or "The creature does as asked as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved."

 

[Lyxen]

No, there are not. There is only advice to the players on how the DM might decide to improvise, possibly using dice rolls, but there aren't rules. There is no "Attitude" score or "+1 to Attitude if you succeed against a DC of 15" or anything like that.

Between the actual DCs provided in the DMG and the advice in the PH, there are actually quite a few rules, taking into account that this is 5e and that rules are fuzzy anyway in that edition. For example, the rules for getting advantage, including in combat, which is very hefty modifier are not more precise than:

• Circumstances not related to a creature’s inherent capabilities provide it with an edge.
• Some aspect of the environment contributes to the character’s chance of success.
• A player shows exceptional creativity or cunning in attempting or describing a task.

Lots of people don't like this because, contrary to previous editions, it's not a set bonus for something which is clearly verifiable on a grid, but it's still a rule. And it's the same when the PH tells you: "Your roleplaying efforts can alter an NPC's attitude, but there might still be an element of chance in the situation. For example, your DM can call for a Charisma check al any point during an interaction if he or she wants the dice to play a role in determining an NPC's reactions." It's still a rule that tells you that, depending on the circumstances, it might be a charisma check to alter the attitude. After that, there are other rules to tell you the DC, etc.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I globally agree with your post, just wanted to add that in addition to the "applicable or not", there is also the question, both for PCs and NPCs, what does "applying them" mean. For NPCs, clearly there are some rules about attitude change, but beyond that, it's a very open question as well.

No, there are not. There is only advice to the players on how the DM might decide to improvise, possibly using dice rolls, but there aren't rules. There is no "Attitude" score or "+1 to Attitude if you succeed against a DC of 15" or anything like that.

There actually are. In the Social Interaction section on page 244 of the DMG:

- - - - - - - -
Changing Attitude.
The attitude of a creature might change over the course of a conversation. If the adventurers say or do the right things during an interaction (perhaps by touching on a creature's ideal, bond, or flaw), they can make a hostile creature temporarily indifferent, or make an indifferent creature temporarily friendly. Likewise, a gaffe, insult, or harmful deed might make a friendly creature temporarily indifferent or turn an indifferent creature hostile.

Whether the adventurers can shift a creature's attitude is up to you. You decide whether the adventurers have successfully couched their statements in terms that matter to the creature. Typically, a creature's attitude can't shift more than one step during a single interaction, whether temporarily or permanently.
- - - - - - - -

And then there's the Conversation Reaction table as well.

I mean, short as it is, that 3 page Social Interaction section as a whole is actually pretty useful. And pertinent to the conversation here.

EDIT: ninja'd by @Voadam

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think if we’re at the point that we have to argue about the definition of “rule” we may have jumped the Wereshark.

 

[iserith]

Well there is DMG page 244-245 expanding on social interactions with some more suggestions including the NPC three attitude framing (friendly, indifferent, hostile) and a conversation reaction chart with entries like "The creature accepts a significant risk or sacrifice to do as asked." or "The creature does as asked as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved."

There actually are. In the Social Interaction section on page 244 of the DMG:

- - - - - - - -
Changing Attitude.
The attitude of a creature might change over the course of a conversation. If the adventurers say or do the right things during an interaction (perhaps by touching on a creature's ideal, bond, or flaw), they can make a hostile creature temporarily indifferent, or make an indifferent creature temporarily friendly. Likewise, a gaffe, insult, or harmful deed might make a friendly creature temporarily indifferent or turn an indifferent creature hostile.

Whether the adventurers can shift a creature's attitude is up to you. You decide whether the adventurers have successfully couched their statements in terms that matter to the creature. Typically, a creature's attitude can't shift more than one step during a single interaction, whether temporarily or permanently.
- - - - - - - -

And then there's the Conversation Reaction table as well.

I mean, short as it is, that 3 page Social Interaction section as a whole is actually pretty useful. And pertinent to the conversation here.

EDIT: ninja'd by @Voadam

While true, nobody reads the DMG!

 

[Lyxen]

I think if we’re at the point that we have to argue about the definition of “rule” we may have jumped the Wereshark.

I'm sorry but when you have multiple pages presenting you with procedures, tables with DCs and effects, these are clearly rules in any gaming system. You might not want to use them (I usually don't, since at our tables we rely more on roleplay and a few appropriate checks when the passives are not sufficient or the DM wants a bit of randomness), but there are quite a few rules about social interaction in 5e.

 

[Lyxen]

While true, nobody reads the DMG!

Half of them are in the PH.

 

[iserith]

With regard to the social interaction rules in the DMG (which I use a lot to adjudicate challenges), by design it looks to me that you have a chat with the NPC to try to improve their attitude, sussing out the NPC's agenda, ideal, bond, and flaw for advantage if you roll, then you make the ask, which is cross-referenced with the DC table. There is notably nothing that says what level of effort (or successes) is needed to move an NPC from one attitude to another, even temporarily. How hard does the party have to work to turn a hostile creature friendly? This is left to the DM to decide. For my part, I tend to create specific objections to be overcome by the PCs and then if the PCs overcome most of them, it shifts the attitude. Each attempt to overcome an objection may call for a roll or not as with any action declaration.

Even more notably as it relates to the discussion, these rules don't apply to influencing PCs!