When do you use Reaction Rolls?

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Do you let characters with such high reaction bonuses into your games?

I wouldn't, no. Some characters in games I'm currently in have quite large reaction bonuses, but that's +6 or so.

I use reactions rolls quite often when characters meet new people. When the meetings are important, I will ask the player what their bonuses are, and we'll decide which ones are applicable, which is usually not controversial.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

How do you deal with characters with such enormous reaction bonuses?

I don't because no one has ever made Captain Charisma. But if so, I'd deal the same way I'd deal with a lower Reaction bonus Character; add their reaction bonus to 10 and see how life generally deals with them.

Do you let characters with such high reaction bonuses into your games?

In the right game, sure. But most games I run really aren't 'the right game'.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ

I've found that most GMs don't use them. Basically you're paying for "the GM might or might not roleplay NPCs as being more cooperative." Which is awful expensive at the price of reaction modifiers.

Even if you totally remove reaction rolls, 'Talent: Influence Skills' is worth the 5 points per level.

[ErhnamDJ]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Even if you totally remove reaction rolls, 'Talent: Influence Skills' is worth the 5 points per level.

That's true. The playstyle I often see, however, is players trying to roleplay and then not using the influence skills that their characters possess, and the GM not calling for a roll. In which case the player misses out on receiving their bonus. Everything is done through roleplay (which doesn't always go the PC's way).

Which is an issue with the players not remember to use their skills to make influence rolls. Maybe the influence rolls section of the book needs to hire a PR team.

[Brandy]

I use 3-18 reaction rolls extremely rarely (I can recall only once: the PCs were at a fancy dress do among Nobles in a situation with a great deal of political and romantic intrigue; that was a scenario where I could imagine such a wide range of response from NPCs, anything from a challenge due to an imagined slight to their honor or an immediate welcoming into their circle to gain leverage over their rivals).

For the most part, either an NPCs reaction is fixed for strangers, no matter how charismatic (shopkeeps and the like), or they are variable in a narrower range. (if i roll, I roll 3d6 using "average dice" numbered 233445). Passive reaction benefits wont take an NPC out of their possible range of reaction; as a consequence, for most NPCs, 15 is the "best case" reaction to a stranger.

A character like that would have spent on influence well past the point of diminishing returns in my games.

[Black Leviathan]

Every time I feel that my NPC is looking the players up and down, that's a reaction roll. If I'm meeting them in an insecure location. If they're telling me something I have no reason to believe. If they're asking me for anything without offering me something I want or if they're making any kind of non-standard bargain with me (For instance if you're buying eggs at my egg stand, you drop some copper in my hands and get a box of eggs, but if you want to trade me a gun or jewels for eggs, I'm skeptical) Any time there's a conflict that maybe could turn violent. Any time the characters display an aptitude I didn't know they had. Any time the characters do something that I find offensive. Any of those are a chance for me to change how I feel about the characters.

[Rupert]

I use reaction rolls when NPCs interact with the PCs, I have no particular idea of how they'd react, and the PCs don't try to influence them with skills. Most of the time the players like rolling vs their PCs' influence skills, because they're more concerned about very negative results than about getting the best possible positive result (and they tend to have high IQs and lot of points in skills more than they have high reaction bonuses). Overall, I don't roll them terribly often.

[vicky_molokh]

A thing I'm curious about, aimed at people who are reluctant to use Reaction Rolls out of worry that they'll produce too good reactions: how often do good/excellent reactions (from 30+ points spent on Reaction Modifiers) result in actually big changes to the big picture, in the same way as, say, 30+ points spent on assassination skills, or on Innate Attack, or on mind control, or on various scrying abilities, or on Gadgeteering?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

A thing I'm curious about, aimed at people who are reluctant to use Reaction Rolls out of worry that they'll produce too good reactions: how often do good/excellent reactions (from 30+ points spent on Reaction Modifiers) result in actually big changes to the big picture, in the same way as, say, 30+ points spent on assassination skills, or on Innate Attack, or on mind control, or on various scrying abilities, or on Gadgeteering?

Depends heavily on how many NPCs you make immune to reaction modifiers. If you actually let reaction modifiers work, a +6 reaction modifier is far more significant than any of the other things you describe.

[Icelander]

I see a lot of high Reaction Roll bonuses, especially in my long-running D&D-esque fantasy game set in the Forgotten Realms, among other things because I often award PCs with local Reputations for heroics that last for weeks or months (and are then often paid for by players that want to convert their brief celebrity into lasting status as famous heroes).

That, and the PCs are all rich, well-connected and tend to have formal status derived from political success (merchant guildmaster, sheikh, governor-general), birth (one of numerous younger sons of a ruling emir over a nearby city, apparent bastard of sultan from distant but awesomely powerful land), connections (betrothed of orphaned noblewoman without legitimate male heir, becomes new lord upon marriage) or chivalry (membership in knightly order).

I've also noticed that players often want Appearance and Charisma not so much for any possible game benefits, but because they want their PCs to be gorgeous, charming and fascinating. After all, you can tell protagonists by how everyone notices them, thinks about them, reacts to them and considers them important. High Reaction Bonuses are a game-mechanical way to represent that.

I use Reaction Rolls in my campains, but I'm pretty free with penalties for situation. If the PCs waft in like presumptuous Prima Donnas who are expecting NPCs to drop everything to help them, taking risks on their behalf, getting involved in their famous feuds and angering their infamous enemies, etc., that will be worth hefty penalties.

Heck, just typical PCs behaviour where everyone armed and harnessed at all times, 100% on alert even when among friendly villagers in a supposedly safe area, will be worth a hefty Reaction penalty. And if the PCs, as they often do, travel with allies and companions that average people consider outlaw bandits at best, man-eating monsters at worst (e.g. PCs who aren't clearly regular humans related or at least personally known to someone local), that's more penalties.

With enough positive modifiers, PCs can indeed usually get Excellent Reactions, even when ordinary mercenaries or caravan guards met with in similar circumstances would be distrusted as armed and potentially violent strangers. And in circumstances where the PCs are not armed, harnessed, threatening and curt, but genuinely trying to be friendly and approachable, the results will be like rock stars or other celebrities visiting their fans.

The PCs can move through the people as the fish swims through the sea, even if they only meet strangers and are being followed by intimidating agents of legitimate Evil Empire authority. No one would dream of informing on them, even for high bounties, and they'll be offered any help that the people can give. They'll be feted and courted everywhere they go, dewy-eyed dreamers will ask to join them and if anyone even asks them to pay, they'll get the best terms possible for any commercial transaction. Any cause the PCs espouse will be enthusiastically adopted among those they meet, even to the point of people they've only known for a short period of time sacrificing their lives for them.

Basically, the PCs will be treated as the cinematic versions of Sir James Brooke, Rob Roy, William Wallace, Robin Hood, T.E. Lawrence ('Lawrence of Arabia'), Charles George Gordon ('Chinese Gordon'), Muhammad Ahmad ('the Mahdi' in Sudan), Roman Von Ungern-Sternberg ('the Mad Khan'), Hernan Cortéz or any other charismatic warlord, revolutionary or adventurer during that phase of their careers where their following grows by leaps and bounds.

I've found that this is quite okay. Not only doesn't it negate any of the drama of dealing with truly antagonistic NPCs (with a pre-determined Reaction), but it also allows spies, assassins and other foes to hide among the dozens, hundreds or thousands of actually loyal admirers.