PDA

View Full Version : 5e Social Combat Mechanics



Grod_The_Giant
2016-09-28, 09:15 PM
Based on Fate and Exalted 3e, here are some (hopefully) simple rules to make social encounters more mechanically interesting and satisfying.

New/Resolved Character Features

Characteristics: Characteristics, as described in the PHB, become the core of the system. In addition to generating the five listed, designate each one as Minor, Major, or Defining. A character must have at least one of each strength, and no more than two Defining Characteristics at any one time.

A Minor Characteristic is a significant aspect of your personality, but not a major part of who you are-- they could be lost or changed without being too noticeable.
A Major Characteristic is a broadly applicable belief, one of the core tenants of your personal philosophy. They influence your behavior even in situations where they only tangentially apply, and can lead you to act against your own self-interest or even safety.
A Defining Characteristic is one of the more important parts of your life, beliefs that you absolutely will not change or compromise, and without which you wouldn't be recognizably yourself. They are the things you would lay down your life for, if necessary, and the inform almost every aspect of your behavior, one way or another.

Resolve: Your Resolve is your ability to keep your own head and resist outside influence-- think of it as your social AC. It is equal to 10+Proficiency Bonus+Wisdom modifier. Additionally, you can draw upon your Characteristics to strengthen your Resolve. A Minor Characteristic gives you a +2 bonus, a Major Characteristic a +3, and a Defining Characteristic a +4. You may only apply one Characteristic at a time, and you may only use each Characteristic once in a given conversation. (Note: If using Expertise as written, characters with Expertise in Insight, Persuasion, Deception, or Intimidation should add their Proficiency bonus to Resolve a second time)
Integrity: Your Integrity is basically your stubbornness-- how long you can keep arguing, even when things aren't going your way-- think of it as your social HP. You have Integrity equal to 10+Wisdom Modifier.

Social Conflict
Roleplaying becomes clunky if restricted by the initiative system, so social conflicts don't operate in turn order. Anyone can speak at any time. The only restriction is that a character cannot take two social actions in a row-- there must be at least some back and forth. If multiple characters attempt to speak at once, make an opposed Charisma check; the winner successfully gets their words out first or speaks over the loser. There are six special social Actions. Unless otherwise specified, any skill may be used when making a Charisma Check.

Read: You attempt to draw out another character and get a sense of what makes them tick. When making a Read attempt, you must first ask a question. Not necessarily a literal in-character question, but you need to know what you're looking for-- "what's his opinion on the king?" "Who's most important in her life?" Once you're specified a question, make an Insight check against another character, opposed by their Resolve. On a success, you learn the Characteristic most related to your question, and its strength-- or, if they have no such Characteristic, you learn that as well. If they have multiple Characteristics, you learn that as well.
Instill: You attempt to alter another character's viewpoint, at least temporarily. Make a Charisma check, opposed by their Resolve. On a success, you may alter their Characteristics in one of the following ways. Characters may revert changes at the rate of one per hour, although even afterwards thoughts or actions from that time still seem perfectly normal.

You may add a new Minor Characteristic, or remove one of their existing Minor Characteristics
You may strengthen a Minor Characteristic to Major, or reduce an existing Major Characteristic to Minor, provided they have a second Characteristic of at least Minor strength that you draw upon to support your case.
You may strengthen a Major Characteristic to Defining, or reduce an existing Defining Characteristic to Major, provided they have a second Characteristic of at least Major strength that you draw upon to support your case. This includes both negative and positive manipulation. You can use Instill actions to rally your friends, and to undo the results of enemy persuasion.
Influence: You attempt to bring another character around to your way of thinking-- the rough equivalent of a "social attack," if you will. Make a Charisma check, opposed by their Resolve. If you succeed, you inflict 2 points of lasting Integrity damage. If you can draw on on of their Characteristics, your skill check and the damage is increased-- +2 for a Minor Characteristic, +3 for a Major, and +4 for a Defining. As with using Characteristics to boost your Resolve, you may only apply one Characteristic at a time, and you may only use each Characteristic once in a given conversation.
Engage: Also known as the "tell me more" action, Engaging is simply following the line of conversation without really trying to influence it. When you take the Engage action, pick one opponent. You gain Advantage on your next social action taken against them, and they gain Advantage on their next social action taken against you.
Disengage: You can also attempt to simply end a conversation without making an active effort to persuade anyone. All Influence actions against you are made at Disadvantage until the start of your next turn. If you take three consecutive Disengage actions, you may end the social conflict with as much or little grace as you desire.
Persuade: You attempt to directly persuade another character, requesting a major favor from them. You may only take a Persuade action if two conditions are met: the target's Integrity must be zero, and you must be able to draw on an appropriate Characteristic. The greater the request, the stronger the Characteristic must be. A Minor Characteristic will suffice for simple tasks that will not seriously disrupt their lives, such as delivering a package for you, or letting you into a nightclub. Drawing on a Major Characteristic will let you persuade people to make major changes to their lives-- they might join your army or break the law on your behalf, as long as death or ruin isn't certain. If you can cite a Major Characteristic in your favor, however, you can make people do almost anything. A rich merchant might donate almost his entire fortune to your cause, and a band of soldiers will face a flight of dragons to buy you time to flee.


Special Option: Group Integrity: For conversations with two or more distinct factions-- for example, if the entire party is attempting to persuade a pair of guards to let them inside the castle-- the easiest thing to do is to use a single Integrity pool for each tide. If you do, take each party's average Integrity, then add the number of people in the group. For example, if one side consists of three guards, with Integrity of 10, 12, and 8, their group Integrity would be 13.

Inglorin
2016-09-29, 07:25 AM
Characteristics: Characteristics, as described in the PHB, become the core of the system. In addition to generating the five listed, designate each one as Minor, Major, or Defining.


I don't know if these characteristics can be lifted that easily from the backgrounds, as you think they might. I, for example, would be hard pressed to identify which of my flaws, bonds or personality traits would count as Defining. On the other hand: Not every npc (and that seems to be the main opponent in these encounters) is written in a way, that these characteristics are obvious. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but it is much harder than you would guess on first sight.




Read
Instill
Influence
Persuade



Which characteristic is read? The lowest one first or always the defining characterstic first? The mechanically more valueable defining charactersistic would be more obvious (as you said: it is the DEFINING characteristic) to read, wouldn't it?

What is missing (I think) are the defending moves. If my bard tries to gain some sponsoring from a random shopkeeper around the corner, there wouldn't be anything the shopkeeper would want to do. He needs to keep his money and therefor should be able to defend against the bard. He could "persuade" him to leave (after discussing the bard's history with his long lost family (bond)), but shouldn't he be able to just close the shop and throw him out into the street?

Also, these rules should include some stipulation for the usage of the characteristics in an attack. The selected characteristic (or the used skill proficiency) should at least have some significance in the argument. Let the player explain what this significance is.

All in all I am not really convinced, that these rules help as much as I would like them to. Social Interaction is notoriously underrepresented in rules, and for a good reason. It is bloody hard to create general rules for these scenes. Social interaction is so diverse, that not much can be abstracted (I think) without loosing a whole lot (of roleplaying) in the process.

(Note: I should revisit the social interaction rules in Burning Wheel sometime... I remember them to be quite interesting.)

Grod_The_Giant
2016-09-29, 09:49 AM
I don't know if these characteristics can be lifted that easily from the backgrounds, as you think they might. I, for example, would be hard pressed to identify which of my flaws, bonds or personality traits would count as Defining. On the other hand: Not every npc (and that seems to be the main opponent in these encounters) is written in a way, that these characteristics are obvious. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but it is much harder than you would guess on first sight.
I was mostly trying to piggyback on existing mechanics where possible, so I should probably mention generating your own, but I don't think it's as hard as you think. Especially since 5e has tables of characteristics for various backgrounds that can be used to quickly generate NPCs. Heck, you could randomly pick one defining and two major traits from the list. Here, imagine:

Bob the Blacksmith

Perfectionist (Minor)
Always wants to know how and why things work (Major)
Believes his talent was given to help the world (Defining)
Created a masterwork, and is now looking for someone who deserves it (Major)
One stole from his guild, and is still guilty about it. (Minor)

Boom, well-defined character.


Which characteristic is read? The lowest one first or always the defining characterstic first? The mechanically more valueable defining charactersistic would be more obvious (as you said: it is the DEFINING characteristic) to read, wouldn't it?
Good point-- I think I'll make it more of an ask a question/get an answer thing.


What is missing (I think) are the defending moves. If my bard tries to gain some sponsoring from a random shopkeeper around the corner, there wouldn't be anything the shopkeeper would want to do. He needs to keep his money and therefor should be able to defend against the bard. He could "persuade" him to leave (after discussing the bard's history with his long lost family (bond)), but shouldn't he be able to just close the shop and throw him out into the street?
I guess I should note that ending the conversation (without physical rudeness) is always an option when someone's Integrity hits zero?


Also, these rules should include some stipulation for the usage of the characteristics in an attack. The selected characteristic (or the used skill proficiency) should at least have some significance in the argument. Let the player explain what this significance is.
That's the idea. Sorry, I thought that was clear enough; will fix.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-10-30, 08:25 PM
Update: I've added a defensive maneuver. I'm not 100% sure if it should have a cost or not; as-is it feels kind of strong, but I also kind of feel like if you can't come up with something to make the target listen to you in three rounds you should lose the conflict. Thoughts?

Update 2: Also the Engage action, which again I'm a little uncertain of, but I feel like there should be a default, "I'm listening..." kind of thing.

djreynolds
2016-10-31, 03:51 AM
I've always wanted to homebrew a "Reservoir Dogs" showdown. Intimidate, persuade, deceive... or die.