PDA

View Full Version : Social "hit points" and mental attributes used for "social combat?"



harpy
2009-12-03, 10:25 AM
Just wondering if this kind of system has ever been implemented.

I did get pointed me to Dynasties and Demagogues from Atlas Games and I finally tracked down a copy. The social battles in there are a much more crunchy and interesting compared to anything else I've seen.

Are there any other social systems that have been developed for D&D?

Has anyone developed a social combat system where you have social "hit points" and the mental stats get translated over, such as:

Intelligence = Strength
Wisdom = Dexterity
Charisma = Constitution

in terms of their functional roles within the social combat?

Intelligence modifies your ability to attack your foe. Being able to understand the social milieu allows the character to deliver efficient social attacks at a person or argument.

Wisdom is largely defensive in a social situation, though it can be used offensively in certain circumstances. Knowing how to feel out a situation, when to say something and when not to is essential in dealing with others.

Charisma modifies your social hit points. Those with a lot of charm and good looks can sustain themselves and "survive" longer in debate than someone who stutters and is painfully ugly.

In terms of the 3.0/3.5/4e system I could easily see combat maneuvers being translated over to elements derived from debate/forensics handbooks. I don't know what they are, but there has to be some structured social "maneuvers" that could be implemented.

There could be social buffing and debuffing, social AC, etc.

Even a "massive damage threshold" save, except it would be a Will save. Heck, you could even have a coup de grace based off a Will save.

Anyway, I'd be surprised if someone hadn't implemented a system like this in the last decade, and I'd be shocked if it hasn't been done at some time in the last 35 years.

Anything people can point to? Or has it be used and shown to be an awful system?

ocdscale
2009-12-03, 10:43 AM
I would change your attribute matching a bit.

Charisma isn't how pretty you look, it's the force of your personality. A pretty boy wallflower would have a low Cha.
A charismatic combatant can really just brute force over someone with less strength of personality. But I agree with the idea that someone with a more forceful personality is more difficult to wear down.
Cha ~ Str + Con

An intelligent social combatant lacks the natural "glow" that a charismatic combatant has, but their intelligence leads to their arguments and maneuvering to being better planned to strike weak points in their opponents defenses. Think "scheming counselor to the King." Their attacks carry a lot of force, and are more penetrating.
Int ~ Str + Dex

A wise social combat knows the ways of the world. They can better 'roll with the punches' which gives them lasting power in social confrontations. They also 'see' weaknesses in their opponents defenses and intuitively know the right time to put their schemes into action.
Wis ~ Dex + Con

Glimbur
2009-12-03, 10:52 AM
Exalted has some social combat rules. I haven't played it, but the names of the Charms seem really cool.

valadil
2009-12-03, 10:52 AM
I played a LARP once that had social combat. The LARP was called 6 times 9. I believe it used a modified version of 'Wombat Combat' but it's been ~7 years so my memory is a little hazy.

Basic combat was rock paper scissor. The result of this was somehow added to your combat score. Combat scores usually ranged from 10 to 15 (though I somehow had a 23). The loser of each round halved their combat score. When your combat score reached 0 you were rendered unconscious. Usually people gave up before that happened.

Social combat worked the same way, except with three new symbols. I think one of them was called twiddle, but I can't remember. Other than new symbols, this worked the same as physical combat. Reaching 0 mental reduced you to a blithering idiot.

What was interesting was that you could throw any of the gestures in any fight. Mental compared with mental and physical compared with physical. There were a few occasions of players simultaneously beating each other down with different types of attacks, until both were reduced to uselessness.

Totally Guy
2009-12-03, 10:58 AM
Maybe you and the opponent could each choose an attribute to debate with and they could interact like Rock, Paper Scissors.

And whew you win a round you roll the dice to knock down those social hit points.

Wisdom might beat Charisma but lose to Intellegence.
Intellegence might beat Wisdom but lose to Charisma.
Charisma might beat Intellegence but lose to Wisdom.

So you might think, I know I'm a sharp tongued bard and my opponent is a clever wizard so I'm at the advantage, but because he know's I'd win in a direct duel he'll probably pick Wisdom to make me look rash. But my int is decent. I could get a draw if he plays to his strength.

It could get quite interesting with a bit of flesh to those bones.

Kalirren
2009-12-03, 11:13 AM
So I've been developing a system based upon the White Wolf d10 systems that does exactly this.

The base White Wolf combat system is, for those of you who don't know,

Attacker rolls a dice pool of Dexterity + (weapon skill) to hit.
If enough successes are scored on the attack roll,
Attacker roll Strength + (weapon damage) to deal damage.
If damage is dealt,
Defender rolls Stamina + (armor rating) to soak (i.e., reduce) damage.

Unsoaked damage is then taken to health levels, which imposes penalties upon future actions.

You can easily see how this system is generalizable to social conflict, or even large-scale strategic conflict. Just define social and mental attributes in such a way that they can be used like this. For example,

Physical Social Mental
Dex <=> Wits <=> Perception
Str <=> Charisma <=> Intelligence
Sta <=> Composure <=> Willpower

So you could have, for social conflicts for example,

Attacker rolls a dice pool of Wits + (argumentative tactic) to "hit"

Attacker rolls Charisma + (argument's effectiveness) to deal "damage"

Defender rolls Composure + (reputation/expertise) to rebut, i.e. "soak damage."

Unsoaked damage is then taken to credibility levels, and damage to credibility makes subsequent argument difficult.

Or for large-scale strategic conflicts,

Attacker rolls a dice pool of Perception + (some measure of initiative) to "hit"

Attacker rolls Intelligence + (some measure of force) to deal "damage"

Defender rolls "Willpower" + (some measure of vulnerability) to "soak damage."

and unsoaked damage is taken to resilience levels that measure standing in the conflict in general.

For those of you who are familiar with WW, note that these aren't the classical WW attributes. In particular, by "Willpower" I don't mean the thing which you can spend to get 1 automatic success.

Another_Poet
2009-12-03, 11:57 AM
I definitely think it's an interesting idea. However one trouble spot I would point out is that, in a social exchange, even the person who "loses" (an argument, a popularity contest, an attempt at persuasion, etc.) does not "drop" in any way. What happens when you hit 0 social hit points?

In real life there are introverts and extroverts. Introverts such as myself tend to feel exhausted after a lot of socialising, chattering or being in large crowds. Maybe for us introverts, dropping to 0 coail hit points and feeling exhausted or "done" makes sense.

But extroverts supposedly feel even more energy when they spend a lto of time socialising, chattering or being part of large gatherings. I know some extroverts who enjoy arguing and debating even if they're the ones losing - or they just never believe they are losing, no matter how wrong everyone else thinks they are. So how would they drop to 0 social hit points? What could you possibly say to make them feel "done" and drop out of the conversation?

In any case I think social hit points would be based on Wisdom. Wisdom is the "constitution" score of the mind, so to speak. Someone with a lot of wisdom can be belittled and mocked a long time without taking it to heart or feeling defeated; they have a lot of resilience because they have a calm, perceptive mind. Charisma would be more like adding Str or Dex to your attack roll - you add Cha to your social roll to see how well you do. Honestly I don't believe Intelligence figures into it at all, but you could certainly justify using it as a "social AC" stat (the way you add Dex to normal AC) because yiou can see through certain arguments if you're smart and don't let them phase you.

Just my thoughts.

ap

Totally Guy
2009-12-03, 12:11 PM
The other person is left speechless for a few seconds. And any audience can see their viewpoint has been quashed.

The best way for this to work would be if the stakes were set out first and the parties agreed to debate it. If the stakes could not be agreed a party could opt to leave or remove the other party somehow.
"Hey King, I think you should abdicate and let me rule instead!"
"Guards!":smallmad:
:smalltongue:

The other person is not necessarily convinced. I mean, if got nothing to do with mind control. But they've got to make good on thier part...

Or escalate to violence!

harpy
2009-12-03, 12:21 PM
I definitely think it's an interesting idea. However one trouble spot I would point out is that, in a social exchange, even the person who "loses" (an argument, a popularity contest, an attempt at persuasion, etc.) does not "drop" in any way. What happens when you hit 0 social hit points?

I think it would be trigger by a specific type of challenge, such as the players needing to convince the King that his conniving Minister is in fact evil and trying to usurp the throne. If the player beat the Minister in the social encounter then he's exposed and the King agrees with you. But if the Minister defeats the party then the King follows the advice of the Minister.

or

The players have to speak to a Sphinx to learn the secret of a long lost tomb. If the players with the exchange then they get the secret. If they lose then the Sphinx tires of the conversation and attacks the party.

Haven
2009-12-03, 12:32 PM
The Mutants & Masterminds supplement "Mecha & Manga" has social combat rules for that system.

Sliver
2009-12-03, 12:35 PM
The most important thing is that barbarians should still have the biggest hit die. And they can still debate while raging, actually increasing their HP and having higher attack bonus. Because it is harder to argue with a raging barbarian and it is harder to wear them down...

But I guess they actually will have d4 as social HD (SHD?) while bards, rogues and beguilers (the race, too) will have the highest, probably. Factotums should have pretty high, paladins and clerics possible too. Other casters and general classes then.. Fighters should have larger SHD then barbarians..

Draxar
2009-12-03, 12:35 PM
Given that it's been mentioned but not described, here's the Exalted system

For a non-magical social attack, you roll charisma/manipulation + Presence (to affect one person) or Performance (to affect a group). They defend subtracting an essentially prerolled pool (the appropriate pool halved) from the attackers successes – they either 'dodge' by ignoring the point made (based on Willpower and the Integrity skill), or 'parry' by arguing the point (Manipulation/Charisma + the appropriate skill – Presence/Performance as above in most cases, but alternatives are possible.

There are other factors, you can 'aim' by monolouging – speaking longer to make your point more telling, conceal your 'attacks' using Manipulation + Socialise, and so forth.

One important factor that adds depth to characters is how their personality makes them easier to persade of certain things, and harder of others – character's have intimacies, which are things that they care about. This can be anything from your protective love of your niece, to your love of eating fine food, your hatred of the Mask of Winters, or whatever. They also have virtues (compassion, conviction, valour and temperance), and a motivation (player's chosen long term goal for the character). Social attacks that align with your intimacies, your virtues or your motivation get steadily harder to resist (in that ascending order), whereas those that go against such, or are dangerous, are easier to resist.

A successful social attack can do one of two things. It can make you do a given action for a scene ("Wash the dishes, dear!") if it doesn't go against their motivation, or it can build or erode an intimacy. Doing the latter takes time, as it takes multiple scenes efforts to create or destroy an intimacy, but if well chosen it'll mean they'll be easier to persuade next time.

Now, one of the utterly critical parts of social combat is this: In the absence of supernatural effects, the negative results (forced action or intimacy change) of a social attack can be ignored by spending a single point of willpower. And you can't force someone to spend more than two points of willpower total in a given scene using natural mental attacks (no matter how many try – once they've spent the two, they're just not listening to anyone).

This means you can have the crowded bazaar of insistent merchants, or the enticing whore, present the "You know you shouldn't do this, but go on...", and make it an actual effort and cost for the character to ignore the wiles that they are less removed from than their player.

Given time and captivity, you can break someone. Given time and a neutral group, you can instill your values into people. But it steers well away from causing the issues of "You're playing my character for me".

Any non-magical social combat system should have similar limits on what people can be made to do through it, I'd say.

harpy
2009-12-03, 12:43 PM
The most important thing is that barbarians should still have the biggest hit die. And they can still debate while raging, actually increasing their HP and having higher attack bonus. Because it is harder to argue with a raging barbarian and it is harder to wear them down...

Yeah, I could imagine some kind of rage "defense" going on if a barbarian raged during a conversation. I'm not sure how that would get fleshed out, but something could be inserted there.



But I guess they actually will have d4 as social HD (SHD?) while bards, rogues and beguilers (the race, too) will have the highest, probably. Factotums should have pretty high, paladins and clerics possible too. Other casters and general classes then.. Fighters should have larger SHD then barbarians..

Yeah, that's a good point. To an extent the classes would simply get an inversion of the regular HD with their SHD, with some adjustments. Bards would have a d12, etc.

As for Exalted, that sounds great! Now just needs to get translated into D&D mechanics...

Deth Muncher
2009-12-03, 12:45 PM
HERO System does this. You have what's called a Presence Attack, which depending on your mental fortitude, if you fail you might be cowering, or intimidated, or what have ypu.

Draxar
2009-12-03, 01:09 PM
Yeah, I could imagine some kind of rage "defense" going on if a barbarian raged during a conversation. I'm not sure how that would get fleshed out, but something could be inserted there.



Yeah, that's a good point. To an extent the classes would simply get an inversion of the regular HD with their SHD, with some adjustments. Bards would have a d12, etc.

As for Exalted, that sounds great! Now just needs to get translated into D&D mechanics...

Charisma based 'attacks' resisted with your wisdom. Being hit = temporary wisdom damage (temporary in such a fashion that a nights sleep would restore more than 1 point), or doing what they demand. Possibly actually, have social hitpoints, and once those hit zero, you take wisdom damage.

Once you've taken X amount of wisdom damage (2-4) normal social attacks can't be done any more, though magical ones probably still could.

Would also explain why monks are able to maintain their ascetic lifestyle.

Arakune
2009-12-03, 01:14 PM
PC1: I will hit you with my fan talk about twillight.
DM: Hey! We agreed to not use Power Word: Kill here!

Sliver
2009-12-03, 01:16 PM
Charisma based 'attacks' resisted with your wisdom. Being hit = temporary wisdom damage (temporary in such a fashion that a nights sleep would restore more than 1 point), or doing what they demand. Possibly actually, have social hitpoints, and once those hit zero, you take wisdom damage.

Once you've taken X amount of wisdom damage (2-4) normal social attacks can't be done any more, though magical ones probably still could.

Would also explain why monks are able to maintain their ascetic lifestyle.

I don't think ability damage is good here.. SHP damage is better.. Being reduced to 0 SHP means you lost and everybody know it, but it doesn't force you to surrender. You can give up before the end if the opponent is too tough. Losing but still not giving up on your position gives you the reputation of being stubborn and close minded, and social combat should happen either publicly, if you want to get something from the SC or as a competition/challenge if it is for fun or honing your skillz.

Draxar
2009-12-03, 01:34 PM
I don't think ability damage is good here.. SHP damage is better.. Being reduced to 0 SHP means you lost and everybody know it, but it doesn't force you to surrender. You can give up before the end if the opponent is too tough. Losing but still not giving up on your position gives you the reputation of being stubborn and close minded, and social combat should happen either publicly, if you want to get something from the SC or as a competition/challenge if it is for fun or honing your skillz.

It depends what you're trying to model.

If you're trying to model debate or public argument, then (assuming D&D) a skill based system would be best – Diplomacy and Bluff. Make it so you need a certain number of successes, or you need to beat your opponent by a certain point, or a certain total number (i.e. you need to be 50 ahead of them, where if you both roilled, they got 10 total (skill+dice+modifiers), you got 20, then after 5 identical results you'd win).

At that point you don't need hit points, as they're not attacking you, they're attacking your arguments. Bards and such already win this because they have higher charisma and better ranks in those skills.

If you want to model the fact that a skilled salesman can persuade you to buy something you don't really need, or that walking through a bazaar looking for something while dozens of people trying to sell you other stuff is mentally exhausting, then thats the sort of situation my suggestion models.

harpy
2009-12-03, 01:47 PM
In one of the other threads I'm discussing this someone brought up this system (http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/qsam8) from Mongoose.

It's definitely going down the path I was contemplating, although not the whole way.

Sliver
2009-12-03, 01:48 PM
If you want to model the fact that a skilled salesman can persuade you to buy something you don't really need, or that walking through a bazaar looking for something while dozens of people trying to sell you other stuff is mentally exhausting, then thats the sort of situation my suggestion models.

Hmm.. So planar bazaars should be avoided.. Those magical salesmen could put you into coma!

Draxar
2009-12-03, 02:05 PM
Hmm.. So planar bazaars should be avoided.. Those magical salesmen could put you into coma!

If they're allowed to do so, yes.