Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-03-2013, 04:35 PM   #1
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

Greetings, all!

Thinking some more on the Magnificent Bastard, the Renegade Shepard, and other stuff, got this idea:

An archetypical Renegade's highest Influence skill is Intimidation. However, fictional Renegades do manage to convince people using methods other than by threatening them. One of the methods is to leverage the toughness and scariness into traits that are nice to have on one's side, while still relying on the more diplomatic (or appealing, or whatever) approach. Well, seems like Social Engineering already has support for it: the Manipulation rules (SE37). Use Intimidation as the Manipulation skill (displaying toughness, but making it visible that any bad stuff will be done to the mutual enemies etc.), and the Influence skill would be Diplomacy, Sex Appeal, or the other, less likely ones. Now you get a +3 to the Influence roll, compensating for a lower skill; since Intimidation is not used as an Influence skill in this context, you don't get the -3 if you're performing a Request for Aid*; you get the neat Very Good reaction of Sex Appeal or the risk-free roll of Diplomacy. You still risk a Very Bad reaction if you fail your Intimidation vs. IQ roll.

Speaking of the Manipulation roll, it seems that it will negate such issues as high Will, Fearlessness and even Unfazeable (since you're not trying to scare the target). On the other hand, since it isn't an Influence roll, it doesn't benefit from Charisma. (Actually, it's sometimes overlooked that Charisma is useful for Intimidation.)

Since this isn't an officially enumerated form of Manipulation, I wonder if a PC needs a special Perk to have access to it.

-----------------------

Speaking of Intimidation in general, maybe I'm sleepy and inattentive, but I can't find the specific rules on the fact that trying to use Intimidation on someone is likely to ruin the relationships/reaction/loyalty in the long term. If this isn't the case, then being an evil overlord is more point-efficient than I thought.

Either way, what else should be considered by a character who is meant to be somewhat controlling/dominating in order to sway underlings (and perhaps even formally equal work partners) to gradually accept him as a leader (formal or otherwise), strict but reasonably fair? I guess this comes as Clique-Forming Theory or something; perhaps it is.

Thanks in advance!
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 02:23 AM   #2
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

Another bit that, it appears, I was missing for all those years:
Fearlessness adds to Will for purposes of Fright Checks, and subtracts from people's Intimidation attempts. However, it also adds to Will to resist Intimidation. So yeah, I just discovered that Fearlessness is twice as useful against Intimidation as against resisting other fearful stuff.

Well, it seems that when it comes to Manipulation (m:Intimidation, i:Diplomacy), the double-dip will be gone: Fearlessness will still subtract from the Intimidation skill, but will not add to the Will roll (since the Manipulation roll is against IQ, while the Influence roll isn't an Intimidation roll). That's one of those non-obvious bits that is nice to know.

So, hundred views and no comments?
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:45 PM   #3
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

In principle, it looks workable.

Can't really comment on the specifics of Social Engineering and why something didn't make it in there, but in my games, using Intimidation for your interactions with someone would certainly not be conductive to a fruitful long-term relationship.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:51 AM   #4
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
In principle, it looks workable.

Can't really comment on the specifics of Social Engineering and why something didn't make it in there, but in my games, using Intimidation for your interactions with someone would certainly not be conductive to a fruitful long-term relationship.
On second thought 'certainly' not conductive is perhaps an overstatement. That bit about some people faking a cheer, while others becoming genuinely loyal - it's probably relevant.

Likewise, there's the interesting issue of whether a given (N)PC should shift reaction towards more negative or more positive with repeated successful attempts. (And this need not be limited to Intimidation.)

Examples:
The standard bully/domestic abuse/master-and-Igor plot, where the victim(s) tolerate being intimidated again and again, until having enough of it and deciding to wreck retribution (sometimes disproportional). (Neutral -> Bad.)
As above, but with eventually being broken and becoming loyal, such turning an Unwilling Ally into a Minion Ally. (Neutral -> Good.)
Another more sine-wave example would be repeated successful attempts at seduction on a character who is negatively predisposed to casual relationships (but not negatively enough to enjoy complete immunity to all attempts). So the reaction would go neutral -> Very Good (success) -> Bad (morning after) -> Very Good (subsequent success) -> ...
Possibly culminating in a discarding of aforementioned quirks, a generally Good reaction and an establishing of an on-and-off relationship . . . or not! (Or perhaps a change of the seducer's general reaction and traits, and an establishing of a stable relationship - who knows.) (I guess this is resolved by simultaneous use of Seduction and Building Trust mechanics by two parties.)
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 07:31 PM   #5
William
 
William's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Upper Peninsula of Michigan
Default Re: [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Since this isn't an officially enumerated form of Manipulation, I wonder if a PC needs a special Perk to have access to it.
I wouldn't require it. If someone has a couple of social skills and wants to creatively use one to benefit another*, I'd be more than happy to let them try. There's already plenty; more won't be odd.

(*Being big on story and all that, I'd prefer if they can give me a good description of how that dialogue unspools.)

Quote:
Speaking of Intimidation in general, maybe I'm sleepy and inattentive, but I can't find the specific rules on the fact that trying to use Intimidation on someone is likely to ruin the relationships/reaction/loyalty in the long term. If this isn't the case, then being an evil overlord is more point-efficient than I thought.
Critical success (on the skill roll) or failure (on the Will roll) produce Fright Checks (Basic pp. 360-361), which will eventually give frequently-nearby minions a bunch of Quirks and, over the long term, mental Disads. It's not hard and fast, but depending on how often Intimidation is used, the probabilities will certainly add up. The evil overlord's minions are twitchy, paranoid and slightly crazy for a very good reason...

Anything involving getting a minion to go "above and beyond" is reasonably interpretable as a "request for aid," which per SE would be "grudging" if elicited by Intimidation.

And, of course, there is the simple reasonableness of having an Intimidation-based relationship not work out well, but we already knew that.

Quote:
Either way, what else should be considered by a character who is meant to be somewhat controlling/dominating in order to sway underlings (and perhaps even formally equal work partners) to gradually accept him as a leader (formal or otherwise), strict but reasonably fair? I guess this comes as Clique-Forming Theory or something; perhaps it is.

Thanks in advance!
Having a slightly intimidating presence that doesn't rise to the level of using Intimidation as a manipulation skill simply strikes me as being below the granularity level in having higher levels in those other skills, or personal Charisma. If you want to use Intimidation without the other person consciously realizing that they're being intimidated, I would suggest using a variant of the Subtlety mechanic; take a penalty to skill, target rolls at Per+4-penalty; if target fails Per roll and your skill roll succeeds, they fail to notice that they were intimidated; if both fail, nothing happens; if target succeeds and your skill roll succeeds despite the penalty, they are still intimidated but they realize you were trying to be subtle; if target succeeds and your skill roll fails, target realizes what you are doing but is not intimidated.

A simpler option might be to have this person regularly use Fast-Talk or Acting in conjunction with their Intimidation, the lie being "you weren't intimidated into this decision, I persuaded you of it." For many people, this might be a lie they wish to believe.
William is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 10:13 PM   #6
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: [Social Engineering] Manipulation, 'Bad Guy Coolness' and related stuff . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Greetings, all!

Thinking some more on the Magnificent Bastard, the Renegade Shepard, and other stuff, got this idea:

An archetypical Renegade's highest Influence skill is Intimidation. However, fictional Renegades do manage to convince people using methods other than by threatening them. One of the methods is to leverage the toughness and scariness into traits that are nice to have on one's side, while still relying on the more diplomatic (or appealing, or whatever) approach. Well, seems like Social Engineering already has support for it: the Manipulation rules (SE37). Use Intimidation as the Manipulation skill (displaying toughness, but making it visible that any bad stuff will be done to the mutual enemies etc.), and the Influence skill would be Diplomacy, Sex Appeal, or the other, less likely ones. Now you get a +3 to the Influence roll, compensating for a lower skill; since Intimidation is not used as an Influence skill in this context, you don't get the -3 if you're performing a Request for Aid*; you get the neat Very Good reaction of Sex Appeal or the risk-free roll of Diplomacy. You still risk a Very Bad reaction if you fail your Intimidation vs. IQ roll.

Speaking of the Manipulation roll, it seems that it will negate such issues as high Will, Fearlessness and even Unfazeable (since you're not trying to scare the target). On the other hand, since it isn't an Influence roll, it doesn't benefit from Charisma. (Actually, it's sometimes overlooked that Charisma is useful for Intimidation.)

Since this isn't an officially enumerated form of Manipulation, I wonder if a PC needs a special Perk to have access to it.

-----------------------

Speaking of Intimidation in general, maybe I'm sleepy and inattentive, but I can't find the specific rules on the fact that trying to use Intimidation on someone is likely to ruin the relationships/reaction/loyalty in the long term. If this isn't the case, then being an evil overlord is more point-efficient than I thought.

Either way, what else should be considered by a character who is meant to be somewhat controlling/dominating in order to sway underlings (and perhaps even formally equal work partners) to gradually accept him as a leader (formal or otherwise), strict but reasonably fair? I guess this comes as Clique-Forming Theory or something; perhaps it is.

Thanks in advance!
A great way to make a Magnificent Bastard is to make him "heroic". Make him full of semi-barbaric military virtue, but perfectly capable of using those qualities for selfish ends and manipulating men into his willing pawns. You know, the type that can hypnotize men into following him into hell just by pouring water out of a helmet into the desert sand.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
intimidation, leadership, manipulation, social engineering

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.