Social Conflicts

[zot]

Yes, exactly my point about social conflicts and reaction rolls in the current rules...

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by zot

Yes, exactly my point about social conflicts and reaction rolls in the current rules...

Back in the late 70s in character social interaction in most RPGs came down to "I have a sword and more HP that you, do what I say." TFT really does need a more nuanced social interaction system for PC:NPC interaction. After all, if you have two individuals from competing political parties or religions trying to sway a croud; how do you decide which speaker wins? GM fiat? Flip a coin?

[zot]

Originally Posted by KevinJ

Back in the late 70s in character social interaction in most RPGs came down to "I have a sword and more HP that you, do what I say." TFT really does need a more nuanced social interaction system for PC:NPC interaction. After all, if you have two individuals from competing political parties or religions trying to sway a croud; how do you decide which speaker wins? GM fiat? Flip a coin?

Exactly. I have two examples of playing out social conflicts in my opposed roll doc. The technique I use isn't the only way to run them but it's been fun for us for the past 10 years or so I've been doing social conflicts this way.

[Rick_Smith]

Hi all,
TFT does not have any sort of Charisma attribute, so the way that you handle social maneuvering is by talents. I'm fine with this.

I do think that use of a single die is wrong, I moved to a 3d6 system for reaction rolls long before GURPS came out, and I think the new TFT system should do this as well.

I do not decide how the social conflict will go based on that roll, it is a starting point. This NPC is well disposed to the player after a minute of social chit chat. That makes the negotiations easier. If a poor reaction is made, the PC can still attempt to talk the NPC into something, but it will be harder.

I've played the Firefly RPG, where every character has a SOCIAL attribute. If you are in a Social conflict and they win the dice roll, then you have to go along with them.

I found that Firefly just felt more gamey than TFT. It was less like the roleplaying we liked, and much more "how can I manipulate the situation so I get lots of bonus dice, and poker chips (plot points), for this upcoming contest?"

I'm not saying that zot's system will play this way. But I don't let reaction rolls 'decide' things. (Exception, the PC's are negotiating with an NPC, and the NPC is totally on the fence, and does not care one way or another. Then I might use a reaction roll to break the tie.)

I had one player who took every talent possible for improving reactions. He wanted to know why all these guys were fighting him. I said, "You are talking away their business and power. They admit you are as charming as all get out. This just makes you a more dangerous enemy, as far as they are concerned. You can't take away their business, and expect them not to fight you."

Warm regards, Rick.

[Wayne]

I don't think this sort of thing should be left to a dice roll.

I like the idea of talents (sex appeal etc) modifying an initial impression but after that I would rely on the player's roleplaying ability.

So if a character has all the advantages in the world but the player is behaving arrogantly in negotiations with the GM as the NPC, then that should be reflected in the NPC's reaction.

[zot]

Originally Posted by Wayne

I don't think this sort of thing should be left to a dice roll.

I like the idea of talents (sex appeal etc) modifying an initial impression but after that I would rely on the player's roleplaying ability.

So if a character has all the advantages in the world but the player is behaving arrogantly in negotiations with the GM as the NPC, then that should be reflected in the NPC's reaction.

That's totally fine, even if my proposed social conflict system gets adopted -- GMs have complete discretion about when to role play and when to go to the dice. A GM would never be forced to use social conflicts at all.

I don't think it's fair, however, to characterize this idea as leaving this sort of thing to a dice roll. It's a way to allow the players to attempt to "initiate social combat", but only when appropriate, not at all as a substitute for role playing. I've been running social conflicts like this for maybe 10 years and I'd say we probably do one social conflict every other session -- it's far from turning RPGs into board games.

One function of social conflict mechanics is that players get to go to the dice as a recourse when they feel that their characters' in-story social actions aren't lining up with how they've been able to express them or when they feel a disconnect between their intentions and how the GM is running a scene.

Another is that the GM can initiate a social conflict when they feel such a disconnect, like if they can tell a player is getting frustrated.

Something unexpected came out of doing social conflicts when we started doing them the way I describe in the proposal... they turned out to be a lot of fun and filled with good role playing!

[Wayne]

Sorry maybe my assessment sounded a bit harsh.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by zot

That's totally fine, even if my proposed social conflict system gets adopted -- GMs have complete discretion about when to role play and when to go to the dice. A GM would never be forced to use social conflicts at all.

I don't think it's fair, however, to characterize this idea as leaving this sort of thing to a dice roll. It's a way to allow the players to attempt to "initiate social combat", but only when appropriate, not at all as a substitute for role playing. I've been running social conflicts like this for maybe 10 years and I'd say we probably do one social conflict every other session -- it's far from turning RPGs into board games.

One function of social conflict mechanics is that players get to go to the dice as a recourse when they feel that their characters' in-story social actions aren't lining up with how they've been able to express them or when they feel a disconnect between their intentions and how the GM is running a scene.

Another is that the GM can initiate a social conflict when they feel such a disconnect, like if they can tell a player is getting frustrated.

Something unexpected came out of doing social conflicts when we started doing them the way I describe in the proposal... they turned out to be a lot of fun and filled with good role playing!

It's also worth pointing out that having systems like this available is absolutely crucial to solo gaming -- which is very hard to do in an RPG as it is, but which mechanisms like this can make very much easier. Combine this with something like what I'm told the Gloomhaven "out-of-dungeon" system is, and you have the beginnings of a "solo sandbox" campaign that you could actually play if no one else is around or available...

[JohnPaulB]

Originally Posted by zot

Exactly. I have two examples of playing out social conflicts in my opposed roll doc. The technique I use isn't the only way to run them but it's been fun for us for the past 10 years or so I've been doing social conflicts this way.

From Zot https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...h.lhjz6j8m40oz

"When to Use Contests and Opposed Rolls
Besides actual contests in the story, the most appropriate time to use opposed rolls, contests, or tasks, is when the characters want to produce a different outcome than they currently have without using violence, like bargaining for a better price, trying to get past a bureaucrat, trying to convince someone of something, interrogation, etc."

Will TFT be adopting an Opposed Challenge type rule? If not Zot's, some in house type?

Because of the limited amount of space in ITL and the time it would takes to rule test, not all the needed talents will end up in Legacy. It might be useful to handle situations where a talent hasn't been created yet or a situation that is awkward to resolve using the those absent rules.

With the proscription on New Talents in Limited Publishing License stuff, this might be a way for those supplement designers to still use sanctioned rule without creating LPL conflict.

[JohnPaulB]

Originally Posted by JohnPaulB

Will TFT be adopting an Opposed Challenge type rule? If not Zot's, some in house type?

Ah, found it. Steve made one.

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=158390