D&D 5E Would you like to see a complex social interaction module early in 5E?

[ThirdWizard]

I love a well designed social combat system. I'd be all for it in D&D if it were fun and interesting to play through.

 

[the Jester]

Yes, I would love to see such a module, and I'd try it out and see what I thought of it. I might not keep using it if it didn't suit my taste, but I would definitely give it a test drive, so to speak.

 

[Minigiant]

I would never use this system. If I'm using "fortune at the end", the closest I'd come to something like this is a die pool, rolled all at once. "Fortune at the beginning", then narrate is something I'd use before that. But mainly, where you see "fortune in the middle" as pulling one out of the game, I see a complex system that doesn't drive narration with "fortune in the middle" as needless complexity. If it has no decision points while it happens, and those decision points don't matter a lot, why bother?

"Fortune and the front" or "fortune at the end" doesn't mater to me. My issue with "fortune in the middle" is that it tends to frame the social interaction into inorganic segments by requiring X amounts of rolls in the middle of roleplaying.

 

[Agamon]

The "No" vote, being listed after "Yes, but for other people" should be read as "No, screw everyone else, I'm the only one that matters"

And I'm not surprised that it's currently 3-1 over the "Yes but" option...

And no, I likely wouldn't use such a rule, but I'm not bitter enough to begrudge those that would.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

"Fortune and the front" or "fortune at the end" doesn't mater to me. My issue with "fortune in the middle" is that it tends to frame the social interaction into inorganic segments by requiring X amounts of rolls in the middle of roleplaying.

Whereas for me, a good "fortune in the middle" system tends to frame the social interaction such that the roleplaying is heightened with every roll. Your bug is my feature.

 

[Mengu]

No, I don't need it, I won't use it. Guidelines for creating intricate social interactions, political plots, and the like? Sure, if you've got the space. Rules? Don't bother.

 

[MarkB]

Isn't D&D supposed to be an alternative to complex social interaction?

 

[Yora]

Unlike combat, social interaction is something I can resolve through talking and something that I feel I can judge based on everyday experience.

Dice are used in combat because we don't have any other means to know how a deadly battle would turn out. But doing something without dice and rules is always preferable.

 

[Minigiant]

Unlike combat, social interaction is something I can resolve through talking and something that I feel I can judge based on everyday experience.

Dice are used in combat because we don't have any other means to know how a deadly battle would turn out. But doing something without dice and rules is always preferable.

But do we know what kind of scientific bluff a 18 Int 14 Cha wizard would give the king in order to deploy the elite guard?

Because I sometimes get a case of the brain farts after hour 4 of the session. Then everything is "Look. Its a monkey!" Or "Because they called your mama fat."

---

Wow that's a lot of No's.

 

[Ferghis]

Unlike combat, social interaction is something I can resolve through talking and something that I feel I can judge based on everyday experience.

Dice are used in combat because we don't have any other means to know how a deadly battle would turn out. But doing something without dice and rules is always preferable.

While this may be something that works at your table, sometimes people want to play characters that are radically different from themselves, which is pretty tough to act out, especially if you're making stuff up on the spot. I like roleplaying as much as the next guy, but I don't even pretend I am a high Int, high Wis, or high Cha person. It's nice if the game offers an opportunity for a shy person to play a silver-tongued character.