What Social Combat systems do you like?

[Saintheart]

Preface: yes, I know Diplomacy in 3.5 r0xx0rs the b0xx0rs, if anybody is still using that dialect of leetspeak anymore. If you like the Diplomacy skill system as is, all power to you.

What I do know is that there's a number of systems out there - paid and unpaid - which try to rework the one-roll Diplomacy system into something a bit more complex. They range from very rules-light, freeform-y sets of rules to hard crunch. In my current campaign I'm actually looking to make social interactions more interesting by picking up some sort of social combat system - preferably already designed and fitted to 3.5, though I'll consider out-system ones like the Game of Thrones social combat system.

So I'm just casting for opinions: what social combat systems rulesets do you like for 3.5? (Homebrew or paid-for publishing, I don't mind, just that you've used it and can tell me how it feels as a player and/or DM to play out.) Ideally something that allows most if not all the party to contribute to the 'combat', not just leaving it down to one person...any thoughts or recommendations?

[Psyren]

I haven't actually used it as its for 3.5, but here is The Giant's Diplomacy Rework (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?172910-Articles-Previously-Appearing-on-GiantITP-com) from this very site in case it helps.

[Segev]

Exalted 3e comes closest to what I think social combat should be. Anything I suggest to brew up for d20 will look like it was cribbed from there (as an effort I made for 5e was accused of being - and for some erason, it did seem like an accusation, despite me seeing no reason why this is a flaw).

I'd start with 5e's Ideal/Bond/Flaw mechanic. It's not MUCH of a mechanic on its own, but it's a good starting point. What this does is define some key points of the personality and motivation(s) of the creature. For sake of ease of writing, I'm going to categorize all three of them as "Drives."

Each character you want to involve in social interaction (you want to get away from it being "combat," because you shouldn't always be viewing it as having well-defined sides and as oppositional) should have one core Ideal, Bond, and Flaw. Then, they can have any number of other Drives (which you should categorize if at all possible). All Drives have numeric ratings; core Drives can't be less than 2. If a Drive ever exceeds the core Drive of the same type (Ideal, Bond, or Flaw), the player may decide his character exchanges his core Drive of that sort for the highest-rated Drive of that same type, as the character's priorities change.

Social interactions can be used to try to identify Drives, play off of Drives, or instill/diminish Drives.

Determining a creature's core Ideal is a Sense Motive check with a DC of that creature's Intelligence minus the rating of his core Ideal.
Determining a creature's core Bond is a Sense Motive check with a DC of that creature's Charisma minus the rating of his core Bond.
Determining a creature's core Flaw is a Sense Motive check with a DC of that creature's Wisdom minus the rating of his core Flaw.

Non-core Drives cannot be detected (i.e. are "concealed") if they're not being demonstrated in some fashion. The DM determines if the scenario evokes a reaction natively. A woman with a Flaw of, "I judge others harshly, and myself even more severely," might not be showing any sign of it if things are going well, but if anybody slips up, it might become detectable. If the DM determines that a non-core Drive is detectable (or "exposed"), it uses the same formula as a core Drive, substituting the non-core Drive's rating for the core Drive's rating.

It takes individual Sense Motive checks to learn each Drive. While you may choose which kind of Drive you're fishing for, you always get the Drives in the order of diminishing rating. If you already know of a Drive, you can roll Sense Motive to learn the next-lowest-rated one that is currently exposed of the same type.

You cannot learn the actual rating of a drive, only its relative strength compared to other known drives.

Diplomacy can be used to read and manipulate a situation in order to try to provoke a Drive into being relevant enough to detect. The DC to expose an unknown Drive heretofore not manifesting (because it hasn't been relevant to the situation) is the target's relevant Ability score (Intelligence for Ideals, Charisma for Bonds, and Wisdom for Flaws) plus the highest-rated Drive currently exposed to detection. If you already know what Drive you wish to expose, you can just bring up a topic relevant to it, thereby exposing it to detection as their interest in it is piqued.

Diplomacy can also be used to distract creatures from a Drive, effectively concealing it again. The DC to do this is the relevant Ability Score plus the rating of the Drive to be concealed. If the character seeking to distract the target and conceal this Drive is playing off of another Drive of the target's, he may add that other Drive's rating to his roll. This can cause a Drive to become concealed if nobody is trying to expose it; if there is somebody trying to expose it, the DC becomes the rival's Diplomacy check, unless the target's base DC is higher.

Attempting to mislead those reading your Drives can be done with a Bluff check with a penalty equal to the rating of the Drive you're attempting to fake; the DC to detect the Drive correctly becomes the Bluff check result. (Bad Bluff checks can actually make it easier to detect a Drive, in the "don't think about pink elephants" sort of way.) Failure to overcome the Bluff DC causes them to be unable to read you.

Similarly, a false Drive can be projected. Projecting a false Drive is also a Bluff check; anybody reading you whose Sense Motive check is less than your Bluff check mistakenly believes that the Drive you are projecting is your strongest Drive.

Strengthening and weakening existing Drives, and instilling new ones, requires exposing the target to an example of it. A new Ideal might require positive experiences with acting in accordance with it, or exposure to its antithesis in a negative way. A Flaw may require introduction to a vice in an enjoyable fashion, or help indulging in it. A Bond may just be as simple as enjoying somebody's company, or having guilt layered on over one's past.

When a creature experiences or participates in an activity related to a Drive - whether an existing one or a prospective new one - characters may roll Diplomacy to attempt to instill or strengthen that Drive, provided the experience was positive. Alternatively, if the experience is negative, and there is a Drive they wish to strengthen or instill which can be painted as antithetical to the experience, that Drive may be instilled or strengthened. The DC in either case is the relevant Ability score plus the current rating of the Drive (which can be zero). If another Drive is applicable to the experience, the DC is raised or lowered by that Drive's rating (depending on whether the other relevant Drive would align with or oppose the new Drive or the nature of the experience). For example, tempting somebody with a Bond of "I will never be a drunkard like my father" to develop a Flaw of "Alcoholism" will have the DC to instill that Flaw raised by the Bond's rating, while the same character having an Ideal of "Commaraderie. I will never pass up an opportunity to deepen my ties to my fellows" would have that Ideal's rating subtracted from the DC to instill the Flaw, provided it was done by taking him out carousing with his friends, family, or coworkers. If multiple Drives apply as bonuses and penalties, only the highest-rated Drive for each sort applies. They don't all stack.

If the Diplomacy roll meets this DC, the Drive's rating increases by 1. (From 0, if he didn't have the Drive before.)

Likewise, negative experiences that can be tied to a Drive (or positive ones that can be tied to opposing a Drive) can face the same DC. If the Diplomacy check succeeds, the Drive's rating reduces by 1, to either a minimum of 2 (for core Drives) or 0 (for non-core Drives). Drives reduced to a rating of 0 are effectively overcome entirely.


Now, how do we use this beyond a self-contained game of making people like or dislike things?

When attempting to persuade somebody to do or believe something, any Drives you are playing on that they happen to have (whether you know it or not) apply. You can choose to appeal to their reason, their ego, or their emotions. Appeals to reason must overcome a base DC of their Charisma score, as you use logical arguments and must overcome their stubbornness. They may, if interested at all, roll an Intelligence check, which either adds to your score or subtracts from it, depending on how honest you're being and how much they would WANT to believe you or agree with you. If any Drives would make them more likely to agree, they subtract from the total DC. If any Drives would oppose it, they add to this DC. As usual, if multiple oppose or agree, only the highest-rated Drive of each is applied.

Appeals to ego behave similarly, except the DC is set by the target's Wisdom score, and they may choose to roll a Charisma check that will either oppose or aid your roll depending on their self-confidence and how much they want to accept your flattery as a real reason to agree.

Appeals to emotion must overcome Intelligence as the base DC in much the same way, and they may choose to roll a Wisdom check to oppose or aid your roll depending on how much they wish to buy into your emotional appeal.

Sense Motive is not used directly, here, but can be used to guage the sincerity of any of these appeals. If the person attempting to persuade is sincere, the DC for the Sense Motive check is the same Ability score their appeal is targeting, plus the highest-rated Drive which could oppose their case. In such a case, the Sense Motive check is a self-evaluation, making sure that your reaction to their appeal is not biased by your own failings. If the person making the appeal is not sincere, the DC is their Bluff check, as you attempt to see through their lies.

Knowing (or at least believing) them to be insincere can negate the entire appeal, if you believe them to be lying about facts on which they're basing the appeal. It's hardly persuasive as an emotional appeal for a bankrupt widdow pleading for money if you believe her to be a lying charletan who is neither destitute nor a widdow, for example.


If the appeal succeeds, the player of the target may choose to acquiesce to it, or to refuse. Acquiescence gains the character a number of points of Thrill (or negates a number of points of Stress) equal to the highest-rated Drive that aligns with the appeal. Refusal gains the character a like number of points of Stress. (Stress gained cannot be "avoided" by "paying" Thrill, even though gaining Thrill can pay down Stress instead of accumulating said Thrill.)


Thrill is a generic resource that a player may expend on any d20 roll that supports an action aligned with one of his Drives. When he spends Thrill (maximum one per roll), he gains a morale bonus equal to the relevant Drive on that roll. (Sometimes, a character may wish to spend Thrill on a roll related to a request that was made of him that earned him Thrill. At the player and DM's option, Thrill spent this way can be tracked, up to the amount of Thrill earned by acquiescing to the appeal; if the appeal is successfully fulfilled, Thrill spent on fulfilling it is refunded. Only, again, up to the amount earned by it, however.)

Stress is a generic resource that the DM may expend at any point when a creature's Drives could conceivably oppose an action, or when the creature is acting in opposition to an appeal that succeeded. The DM selects an appropriate Drive related to either the appeal or opposed to the action being taken, and applies a penalty to the creature's d20 roll for the action equal to that Drive. Players other than the DM may nominate actions for Stress expenditure, on their own or others' characters, but it is the DM's choice ultimately as to whether the roll is meaningful enough for Stress to apply.

[Kelb_Panthera]

There's a thing in PF's Ultimate Intrigue for social combat. I haven't tried it personally but I'd be curious if anyone has any thoughts on it; both praise and criticism.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera
There's a thing in PF's Ultimate Intrigue for social combat. I haven't tried it personally but I'd be curious if anyone has any thoughts on it; both praise and criticism.

I came here to mention this. I’d like to use these rules, but haven’t had the chance yet.

I can say that this subsystem is a little confusing at first glance, and I don’t think the rules are very well presented. They’re featured in the War for the Crown AP, so you can use that as an example of how they’re meant to be used in a campaign.

But even so, I find them a little nonintuitive. They may improve with practice.

.