Applying the 5e system to a deeply political game

[Scyrner]

So I'm intending to run a game that focuses largely on politics and the social pillar, more-so than combat.

I'm concerned about providing opportunities to interact with the system that aren't directly linked to either Deception or Insight.

Anyone have an suggestions?

[hymer]

Stealth to overhear conversations and get incriminating documents. Lore skills to know the traditional motivations and political pressure points of people. Athletics to climb up the tower at night to have a quiet chat with the prisoner. Investigation to find clues to unravel the mysterious conspiracy. Sleight of hand to plant a weapon on someone you need out of your hair for a while. Performance to whip the crowd into a frenzy.

[ImproperJustice]

Well. Most espionage or political games i have ever been in or run usually still have some intense and desperate combats at some juncture.

Surely investigations, magic, and cultivating favors with the player’s representative guilds should all play a role.

To that end, stealth and combat skills could enter play.
Tool kits and the expanded rules from Xanathar’s should really give some insights on how you can expand certain skills to provide additional information gathering, etc.....

I keep thinking back to the plots in the Three Musketeers where forgery and knowledge of church practices were of vital importance to unraveling sinister plots and setting the stage for exciting duels.

[Unoriginal]

So I'm intending to run a game that focuses largely on politics and the social pillar, more-so than combat.

I'm concerned about providing opportunities to interact with the system that aren't directly linked to either Deception or Insight.

Anyone have an suggestions?

A political intrigue will always rely more on RP and strategies based on the game's events than on the rules themselves.

That being said, combat can still happen in that kind of scenario. There is also the various uses of Intelligence (search schemes, dirt on your rivals, or who is in favor with whom with INT(Investigation), for ex), Wisdom (percieve if there is something weird in that party you've been invited, for ex) and Charisma (persuade the viscount to join your side, intimidate the servant into revealing where Sir James spend his nights), to say nothing of the saves you'll need to resist spells, poisons and traps.

What the others said is also really good.

[opaopajr]

Ask them to Declare what they are attempting to do. Further, ask them to Describe how they are attempting to do it. Prevent people from merely throwing dice at the problem without a plan.

Break up complex tasks into exciting segments with their own challenge (e.g. A believable Forgery may include: getting someone to slip out useful names during conversation, stealing a letter from a pocket, making the believable forgery in time -- without notice, replanting the letter...).

Social and Explore have their own structures like Combat, but they are deliberately freeform. This is because the complete contextual possibilities for Imagination Land are too great to reduce to a mere system. If you do, you have a simplified, and not-'breathing' setting that is gameable. Open contextual Ability checks are a feature, not a bug.

[StorytellerHero]

Perception and Insight for listening into conversations and trying to make sense of what is spoken.

Perception and Insight to notice body language and try to understand the meaning behind each gesture.

Little details can matter a lot in the courts of intrigue.

For example, a slight tremble in the left pinky of Aristocrat X could signify that X has been partaking of a recently introduced drug, which could link X to a crime syndicate currently making waves in the local region's underworld.

[Tanarii]

Find a game system designed to support the kind of game you want to run. Don't try to shoehorn the kind of game you want to run into a game system not designed to support it.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Find a game system designed to support the kind of game you want to run. Don't try to shoehorn the kind of game you want to run into a game system not designed to support it.
Agreed. 5e is primarily a combat engine, with a few nods to exploration and essentially nothing in regards to social stuff. Fate might be a better (freely available) fit for a political/social game.

[Tanarii]

Agreed. 5e is primarily a combat engine, with a few nods to exploration and essentially nothing in regards to social stuff. Fate might be a better (freely available) fit for a political/social game.I disagree. It's primarily a game of exploration, punctuated by combat & social encounters as needed.

It's just that D&D's idea of "social" isn't what most people think of when you say that. It means: talk to the guys you run into in the hope you can get lootz without getting killed in the process. That means semi-detailed medium* combat rules & light social rules. :smallamused:

Also, in content volume, it's a game of magic. Specifically spells. Half the players rulebook is spells.

*I'd call 5e D&D's combat rules "light", because I'm comparing them to Palladium or Warhammer or GURPS or Shadowrun. But compared to, say, B/X they're heavier. Compared to AD&D they're "possible to run" (aka streamlined).

[xroads]

Have you considered using a different system? If memory serves, The "A Song of Ice & Fire" RPG has political & social combat built into the mechanics.

[Scyrner]

Thanks for the advice!

[Grod_The_Giant]

I disagree. It's primarily a game of exploration, punctuated by combat & social encounters as needed.

It's just that D&D's idea of "social" isn't what most people think of when you say that. It means: talk to the guys you run into in the hope you can get lootz without getting killed in the process. That means semi-detailed medium* combat rules & light social rules. :smallamused:

Also, in content volume, it's a game of magic. Specifically spells. Half the players rulebook is spells.

*I'd call 5e D&D's combat rules "light", because I'm comparing them to Palladium or Warhammer or GURPS or Shadowrun. But compared to, say, B/X they're heavier. Compared to AD&D they're "possible to run" (aka streamlined).
Oh, it's definitely a game of magic, I'll give you that*. But I disagree about it being exploration-focused. Sure, it's ostentatiously focused on exploration, and "four brave adventurers exploring dangerous places" is at its thematic core, but...outside of a fight, rules largely boil down to "ability check vs vaguely-guided DC" and some brief bits on "how fast can you travel" and "downtime activities." I'd like to see some simple-and-robust rules for tracking things like light and food on long journeys/dungeon delves, on NPC attitudes and morale, on envionmental hazards... I would love to see some good guidance on how to have interesting wilderness encounters that aren't just random fighting. There's guidance on some of those things, at least in the DMG, and Xanathar's expands a bit more, but... if I'm not running a fight, D&D in general doesn't offer much beyond "roll big numbers until you succeed or freeform it."




*Because I was curious, I just counted second level spells.

42 were purely useful for fighting, either killing directly (ie, Scorching Ray), recovering from injury (ie, Prayer of Healing), or preventing injury (ie, Mirror Image).
12 were useful in both combat and exploration-- mostly toolbox spells (ie, Suggestion) and mobility (ie, Misty Step).
19 were purely useful for non-combat stuff. The good ones were mostly divinations (ie Detect Thoughts), but almost a third were painfully situational stinkers (ie, Magic Mouth)

5e is a rules lightish game at best; if you're talking something like a Druid, you've got a pretty fair chunk of complexity and weight. It's certainly better than something like 3.5 or Exalted,

[Knaight]

I'd have to jump on the bandwagon of picking a different system - at this point you're not so much not playing to 5e's strengths as you are directly playing to its weaknesses. This sort of stuff is why we have games like Reign.

[JNAProductions]

I love 5E, and I definitely think you can run a political game in it.

That being said... Other systems do a much better job. If you're married to 5E, you can do it, but another system would probably be better.

[Scyrner]

I might have to swap systems after all, which is a little irritating, but probably wise.

I see Reign and aSoIaF RPG as suggestions. Alternates?

[Willie the Duck]

I might have to swap systems after all, which is a little irritating, but probably wise.

I see Reign and aSoIaF RPG as suggestions. Alternates?

Skullduggary (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/340/Pelgrane-Press/subcategory/561_9877/Skulduggery)would by my vote.

[Amdy_vill]

find a group of players that want that then do you homework . that is all i can say

[Tanarii]

Oh, it's definitely a game of magic, I'll give you that*. But I disagree about it being exploration-focused. Sure, it's ostentatiously focused on exploration, and "four brave adventurers exploring dangerous places" is at its thematic core, but...outside of a fight, rules largely boil down to "ability check vs vaguely-guided DC" and some brief bits on "how fast can you travel" and "downtime activities." I'd like to see some simple-and-robust rules for tracking things like light and food on long journeys/dungeon delves, on NPC attitudes and morale, on envionmental hazards... I would love to see some good guidance on how to have interesting wilderness encounters that aren't just random fighting. There's guidance on some of those things, at least in the DMG, and Xanathar's expands a bit more, but... if I'm not running a fight, D&D in general doesn't offer much beyond "roll big numbers until you succeed or freeform it."
This is a misplaced and unfortunately all too common complaint. The problem is you aren't applying the existing rules to your game.

All the stuff you want is in the PHB using ability score & adventuring chapters (which combines are longer than the combat chapter) and the DMG Creating Adventures, Adventuring Environments, and Running the Game chapters. You just need to apply it to your game.

[Unoriginal]

Politics/social intrigue plots are mostly RP and reacting to the world.

I don't see what the proposed games have that's better for social/politics than any other game. In my experience, when a game has specific rules for that it's mostly "roll your check/on this particular table, we'll see what happen."

I'm open to being surprised if it's different for those games, though.

[Tanarii]

Role playing is making decisions for their characters by the players.

Games have built in tools that encourage intrigue/political approaches (ie decision making) by the players encourage political/intrigue roleplaying.

Ones that have tools that encourage finding hidden caches of treasure (including magical items) to explore and interact with the traps and inhabitants (in either talky, sneaky, trick-sy or violent ways) and take phat lootz encourage dungeon & wilderness adventuring classic D&D style roleplaying.

[Unoriginal]

Games have built in tools that encourage intrigue/political approaches (ie decision making) by the players encourage political/intrigue roleplaying.

And I've never seen a game that managed this, no matter what they tried.