Social Conflict

[nexus]

Assuming the goal was to make a social interaction system similar to the physical combat system what sort of "Combat" option might be included? Of course there'd be a basic Action (using an Interaction or other skill) but what else might hypothetically be present?

 

I know some don't like the idea of modeling social conflict off of physical and I think there are valid arguments for outlook but I'm trying to brainstorm some ideas for taking things in that direction not prove that's its valid so if replies could be framed to keep that in mind (and at least mostly serious) I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Okay. There's two stats, analogous to BODY and STUN. I'm not sure what to call them. One of them represents your overall social standing, and the other represents your current state in the conversation at hand.

 

A thing to note is that an attack against one person can actually involve an interaction with someone else entirely.

[nexus]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Maybe use Presence and a derived characteristic... say Resolve?

[StGrimblefig]

Re: Social Conflict

 

In one of my blog postings here, I use three Primary characteristics:

 

• Presence (PRE) - Social Power. The social analogue of strength.
  Presense determines how much Composure your opponent loses in a social exchange (i.e. attack).
   
  
• Manipulation (MAN) - Social Agility. The social analogue of dexterity.
  Manipulation represents a character's ability to react to changing social situations, read people/crowds and talk fast.
   
  
• Composure (COM) - Social Structure. The social analogue of body.
  Composure represents how much social damage (embarassment, bad vibes, etc) a character can take before losing control and making an a$$ of himself.
  

 

Along with these come the obvious Figured Characteristics:

• Social Combat Value (SCV)
  Social Combat Value represents a character's innate ability to put people off their guard and manipulate social situations. This may be supplimented by complimentary skills (Conversation, Seduction, etc).
  
• Social Defense (SD)
  A character with Social Defense is more adept at deflecting Social Attacks - he can ignore some of the effects of Social Powers.
  

I didn't really consider a social analogue for Stun, as I didn't think there really was one.

 

Of course, to implement social conflict using the physical combat model, we need a number of social combat maneuvers. These I have not yet got figured out. but I have some promising maneuver names:

 

general maneuvers

Sharp Retort

Witty Comeback

Scathing Insult

 

for an Interrogation

Head Fake

Moment of Crisis

Waiting Game

"We're Done Here"

Bad Cop [attacker only]

Goad [attacker only]

Good Cop [attacker only]

Worse Cop [attacker only]

The 5th [defender only]

"I'm No Rat" [defender only]

"Nothing to Say" [defender only]

Story Time [defender only]

 

 

for a Seduction

"Call Me"

Love Is Blind

Show of Good Faith

Compromising Position [attacker only]

Extra Incentive [attacker only]

Hard Sell [attacker only]

Seal The Deal [attacker only]

"We Had Some Good Times" [attacker only]

Wine and Dine [attacker only]

"I Just Can't" [defender only]

In Too Deep [defender only]

"It's Not Right" [defender only]

"It's Not You, It's Me" [defender only]

"People Will Talk" [defender only]

"Tell Me More" [defender only]

 

 

Each maneuver would need to have defined a duration, OSCV and DSCV modifiers, and a clear statement of the results of successfully executing that maneuver.

[Tom Carman]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Of course, to implement social conflict using the physical combat model, we need a number of social combat maneuvers. These I have not yet got figured out. but I have some promising maneuver names:

 

general maneuvers

Sharp Retort

Witty Comeback

Scathing Insult

 

...

 

Each maneuver would need to have defined a duration, OSCV and DSCV modifiers, and a clear statement of the results of successfully executing that maneuver.

 

You might check out the MMORPG Vanguard: Sage of Heroes for their Diplomacy system. You play "cards" which sway the argument to your side, and give you (and your opponent!) points to power these attacks. Each round that the balance marker stays on your side of the argument, you score a victory point; the winner is whoever get to the target number first.

[Egyptoid]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Does this system account for the goal of the speaker.

 

get the audience simply concede one point

get the audience to shut up.

get the audience to agree completely

get the audience to depart hastily.

get the audience to actually listen

[StGrimblefig]

Re: Social Conflict

 

You might check out the MMORPG Vanguard: Sage of Heroes for their Diplomacy system. You play "cards" which sway the argument to your side' date=' and give you (and your opponent!) points to power these attacks. Each round that the balance marker stays on your side of the argument, you score a victory point; the winner is whoever get to the target number first.[/quote']

Interesting. That sounds somewhat like HERO's extended skills contest (from TUSk). The interrogation and seduction maneuvers I listed are "borrowed" from SpyCraft (2.0) which is also somewhat similar, but the balance marker (they call it the lead) is all there is -- once either side gets the lead to the target level, they win.

Does this system account for the goal of the speaker.

 

get the audience simply concede one point

get the audience to shut up.

get the audience to agree completely

get the audience to depart hastily.

get the audience to actually listen

Hmm. Good question. If you are doing something like the above balance or lead concept, you could set the target number based on the level of effect.

 

With the social combat model, though, I think that, as an analogue of physical combat, it is probably not so straightforward, mechanically. It is more of a question of how much to "loser" is willing to lose.

 

For example, if I am a police officer interrogating a suspect, and it is becoming obvious that my target is losing Composure quickly, he is going to have to find a way to get out of this "social combat" without losing all of his composure and telling me everything while weeping like a baby. Perhaps he gives me some information he knows that I want, while withholding some other information that is more valuable, but which I do not yet know that I want.

 

Or, flipping it about, if I am dropping Composure like hot rocks, I will have to try not to lose it all, which might result in my using physical violence and having to deal with the consequences. Perhaps I need to leave the room for a while, to recover Composure (and think up some new tactics) before continuing.

 

In either case there is a roleplaying aspect to the combat, but your success or failure is not totally dependent upon the player's ability (or lack thereof) to roleplay a given situation. If the dice are not going your way, there should be a way to "escape" (figuratively, if not physically) the situation.

 

I suppose there could be something like "pulling your punches" for social combat, so that complete loss of composure is less likely.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Social Conflict

 

 

Or, flipping it about, if I am dropping Composure like hot rocks, I will have to try not to lose it all, which might result in my using physical violence and having to deal with the consequences. Perhaps I need to leave the room for a while, to recover Composure (and think up some new tactics) before continuing.

 

 

Well, I don't like the idea of forcing physical violence just because the social route failed. It should still be the player's decision, based upon his or her knowledge of the character's psychology.

 

Rather, it is obvious that the character will be unable to use Social Skills to get the information out of this person until the character changes track. Temporary immunity to Seduction, Persuasion, Conversation, etc...only from that character, though the confidence should give the opponent bonuses in dealing with the other officers.

[Utech]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Should you wish to go all the way, you could probably modify every Power, Advantage, Limitation, Maneuver, and combat-related Skill and Talent for use in Social Combat.

 

Give players some number of points to build the combat side of a character. Give them another (or the same) number of points to build the social side of a character. Have a character sheet for each.

 

Use whichever sheet is appropriate for the situation at hand.

 

Playing out Social Combat in this way would be just as interesting and exciting as playing out normal combat is right now. While not life and death, it certainly could be a matter of viable personality and broken man.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

If you are going to use the physical combat system for social combat, the one bit I would not port over is Stun/Body - I don't like the idea of being able to wear someone down, at least not that quickly - otherwise you tie someone to a chair ang gag them so they can not respond and, within a few minutes, you could convince them of anything.

 

'Social stats' can include PRE, INT and EGO, and possible COM. Of those, PRE is the most important for attacking and EGO for defending, so we could make OSCV (Offensive Social Combat Value) = PRE/3 and DSCV = EGO/3 (or the higher of EGO/3 or PRE/3). You would not have social 'damage' - it would all be based on level of success.

 

INT is used to determine who goes first, unless there is a reason to change the order. Because social combat usually involves one person having a go and then the other, SPD is irrelevant. Each turn of social combat (which consists of each party making a social combat roll) lasts 12 seconds.

 

Social combat can only be entered by consent, although one or the other party may not have any real choice - if you approach a guard, for instance, and try to engage him in social combat, he may not be able to simple leave. If someone is trying to engage you in social combat then you can make a straight EGO or PRE roll to simply ignore what they are saying, and this may be subject to modifiers assigned by the GM.

 

When social combat starts, each party must declare what they want to accomplish if they win, and the GM can apply an OSCV or DSCV bonus or penalty to each party based on what they are after.

 

The GM might also decide what, if any, optional social skills and manouvres each party is allowed to use.

 

Characters may use complementary skills to try and gain a bonus.

 

You need to roll ((OSCV-DSCV))+11 or less. If you succeed by 4 or more then you win the social combat. Otherwise use the table below.

 

Summary :

 

Roll made exactly; +1 OSCV or DSCV (your choice)

Roll made by 1; +2 OSCV or DSCV (your choice)

Roll made by 2; +3 OSCV or DSCV (your choice)

Roll made by 3; make another attack immediately, if you wish, at +2 OSCV or +4 OSCV or DSCV (your choice)

Roll made by 4 or more; you win the social combat

 

Bonuses last until your next social attack.

 

If you FAIL by 4 points or more, you LOSE the social combat.

 

There are a number of social skills you can lean to use (each costs 3 points to buy, like a skill, and you can use both at once if you have paid for them):

 

Appeal to logic: substitute INT/3 for your OSCV or DSCV

 

Appeal to looks: substitute COM/3 for your OSCV or DSCV

 

You can also purchase and use social maneouvres at 2 points each

 

Press the point: +1 OSCV

 

Take a risk: +2 OSCV, -1 DSCV

 

Draw them on: +1 DSCV

 

Defend your position: -1 OSCV, +2 DSCV

 

Only following orders: Don't make a social attack but gain +4 DSCV

 

Bide your time; Don't make a social attack but gain +2 DSCV and a cumulative bonus of +2 OSCV on your next attack.

 

NB after each turn of social combat BOTH parties gain +1 DSCV, which remains for the entire social combat and is cumulative - generally if you can't convince someone reasonably quickly, there is no point going on.

 

Either party can CONDITIONALLY CONCEED the social combat at any time - they lose the argument but will not go as far as the other party wanted, a sort of partial loss (adjudicated by the GM). If neither party makes an attack in a turn (i.e. if both decide to defend theri position or take Only following Orders) the combat ends.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Sean, perhaps social conflict should be inherently non-cumulative by nature, perhaps working similar to mental powers and PRE attacks (key stat +0, +10, +20 and +30 for levels of effect).

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Sean' date=' perhaps social conflict should be inherently non-cumulative by nature, perhaps working similar to mental powers and PRE attacks (key stat +0, +10, +20 and +30 for levels of effect).[/quote']

 

I'm trying to avoid the idea of social damage, working instead with margin of success because it seems a smoother and quicker system.

 

The only cumulative element is the +1 DSCV per social combat turn, which is meant to signify that you've got the best chance of winning in a social situation if you do so quickly - after that it, once people become entrenched in their situation, it beceomes almost impossible to win an argument (by getting +4 on your roll) and it becomes a matter of waiting for someone to make a mistake, so defensive tactics become more attractive as an argument progresses, thereby increaing the likelhood thet either the argument will end with both parties withdrawing or someone will slip up (rolling -4) and conceed.

[Maur]

Re: Social Conflict

 

And all of these ideas seem to nicely get around the problem of the socially awkward player trying to play the outgoing and well spoken character...

[Markdoc]

Re: Social Conflict

 

What I tend to do is simply use the existing rules. But let the players decide exactly how hard to push. So when you are trying to persuade something to do something, or to believe something, you can go two routes. If you want to do/believe something which is right out there, then you will labour under a major penalty. "These are not the droids you are looking for" (-4 to blow past the guards in one phase).

 

Alternatively you can try to wangle an extended contest. "These droids? Have you any idea how many R2 droids there are around here? Look, there's one over there." (-1 to make the guards receptive to the idea that maybe these really aren't the the droids they are looking for) "And besides, I bought them from honest Al's over on Alderberan St, before it blew up. Do I really have to go home and get the registration? See, I still have the papers here for the moisture collectors we use them for maintenance on!" (-1 to further persuade the guards). "And here's my skimmer registration. I come here all the time. Are you guys new? I know a great cantina called Greedo's..." (-0 to get past the guards, who are starting to lose interest.)

 

I realise this is not the social conflict system Nexus was asking for, but an example of how I handle extended social interactions. But maybe something could be built out of that.

 

cheers, Mark

[nexus]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Some interesting ideas so far, definitely allot to look over. I'm neutral on the idea of Social Damage but it does seem popular among other social resolution systems and does model some effects (wearing someone down/nagging, loss of composure and mental fatigue) but brings issues of it's own.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Some interesting ideas so far' date=' definitely allot to look over. I'm neutral on the idea of Social Damage but it does seem popular among other social resolution systems and does model some effects (wearing someone down/nagging, loss of composure and mental fatigue) but brings issues of it's own.[/quote']

 

In a skill based system (and unlike normal combat) the GM might let you take more than 1 turn to prepare your arguments: if you are able to nag someone for 5 minutes, for example, then that would be +2 on your initial roll or if you are able to make enough attempts (with sufficient gaps to reset any accumulatred DSCV penalties) that nicely simulates wearing someone down - but it DOES take a long time and will not always be possible

[Utech]

Re: Social Conflict

 

In a skill based system (and unlike normal combat) the GM might let you take more than 1 turn to prepare your arguments: if you are able to nag someone for 5 minutes' date=' for example, then that would be +2 on your initial roll or if you are able to make enough attempts (with sufficient gaps to reset any accumulatred DSCV penalties) that nicely simulates wearing someone down - but it DOES take a long time and will not always be possible [/quote']

 

Could you explain what you mean by this, Sean? As a GM I've often allowed players to take more than 1 turn to prepare for a combat -- sometimes as long as a few game days.

 

There's no reason why it must take the same amount of time to resolve Social Combat as it takes to resolve normal combat. You could easily rule that each Segment on the Social Combat Speed Chart is one minute. Or you might find that your best Social Combat Powers have the Extra Time Limitation on them.

 

Naturally it won't always be possible to wear down your opponent in Social Combat. You can't always wear down your opponent in physical combat, either. A good GM will provide appropriate (and entertaining!) encounters.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Could you explain what you mean by this, Sean? As a GM I've often allowed players to take more than 1 turn to prepare for a combat -- sometimes as long as a few game days.

 

There's no reason why it must take the same amount of time to resolve Social Combat as it takes to resolve normal combat. You could easily rule that each Segment on the Social Combat Speed Chart is one minute. Or you might find that your best Social Combat Powers have the Extra Time Limitation on them.

 

Naturally it won't always be possible to wear down your opponent in Social Combat. You can't always wear down your opponent in physical combat, either. A good GM will provide appropriate (and entertaining!) encounters.

 

Hmm. Apart from training or setting up an ambush I'm not sure how you can prepare for physical combat. Still...

 

As for time, well, always a tricky one. The trouble is I would not want to be arbitrary given the choice, and yet the same situation can often be handled in many different ways, some of which will be quick, others not so. Generally it will be advantageous to acheive the same result quickly, so there has to be some sort of bonus for taking more time or no one would do it. It could be a skill bonus or simply a case of HAVING to take the time.

 

As for wearing an opponent down - well, unless there is a massive imbalance in skill levels it is almost always possible to wear down your opponent in physical combat (or die trying), whereas with social combat, even a skilled combatant can fail against an unskilled one - no matter how silver your tongue you might not be able to persuade the socially inept guard to deviate from his assigned orders, and in fact the more you try the more determined he might be to stick to his orders.

 

That leads to a possible complication of social combat: the approach. Sometimes, for instance with the guard, you'll never make him believe this is a surprise inspection if you don't have the right ID, or that you're bringing him new orders, if you don't have the password. You MIGHT be able to get him away from his post with a distraction though. In that case any social strategy other than distraction would fail.

[Utech]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Hmm. Apart from training or setting up an ambush I'm not sure how you can prepare for physical combat. Still...

The most obvious example is picking your ground and taking advantage of the terrain. Setting your people where they'll be most effective. Deciding ahead of time how and when you want to strike your enemy. Moreover, you can study your opponent and decide what sort of weapons and tactics are mostly likely to defeat him.

 

This is strongly analogous to how one can prepare for a social conflict. You can pick the time and place to ask your boss for a raise. You can work up your very best lines to ask someone out for a date. You can decide on the best approach for convincing the guard to abandon his post -- especially if you've studied the guard and know what your best weapons (word) and tactics might be.

 

Generally it will be advantageous to acheive the same result quickly' date=' so there has to be some sort of bonus for taking more time or no one would do it. It could be a skill bonus or simply a case of HAVING to take the time.[/quote']

 

You can Brace, Set, Dodge, Block, Dive for Cover, activate a Power that requires Extra Time... All sorts of things that might take time and set you up for taking your best shot.

 

with social combat' date=' even a skilled combatant can fail against an unskilled one - no matter how silver your tongue you might not be able to persuade the socially inept guard to deviate from his assigned orders, and in fact the more you try the more determined he might be to stick to his orders.[/quote']

 

Sounds like that guard has a lot of defenses (Armor, Force Field, Damage Reduction, Mental Defense, Power Defense, what-have-you) and little in the way of offense. Those defenses probably have a Limitation such as "Only to defend against those who would try to make him deviate from assigned orders."

 

for instance with the guard' date=' you'll never make him believe this is a surprise inspection if you don't have the right ID, or that you're bringing him new orders, if you don't have the password. You MIGHT be able to get him away from his post with a distraction though. In that case any social strategy other than distraction would fail.[/quote']

 

Just as you'll never shoot that guy in the tower unless you have a ranged weapon. You lack the right tools for the job. You might get creative, though. You might distract the guy in the tower. (or you might light the tower on fire...)

[nexus]

Re: Social Conflict

 

That leads to a possible complication of social combat: the approach. Sometimes, for instance with the guard, you'll never make him believe this is a surprise inspection if you don't have the right ID, or that you're bringing him new orders, if you don't have the password. You MIGHT be able to get him away from his post with a distraction though. In that case any social strategy other than distraction would fail.

 

Considering some of the cons that have pulled off in real life (and in fiction) I wouldn't want to declare anything flat out impossible. Some things would be very very difficult, maybe less so depending on the circumstances, the guard is incompetent, easily bullied by authority or just plain rock stupid (Gomer Pyle, USMC) or more so: Ultra trained or nearly brainwashed highly perceptive or just naturally suspicious. of course genre and mood consideration would matter as well. Pulling off an impossible stunt (physical or social) might be appropriate for a light hearted swashbuckler game than a grity game of police procedure and investigation.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Considering some of the cons that have pulled off in real life (and in fiction) I wouldn't want to declare anything flat out impossible. Some things would be very very difficult' date=' maybe less so depending on the circumstances, the guard is incompetent, easily bullied by authority or just plain rock stupid (Gomer Pyle, USMC) or more so: Ultra trained or nearly brainwashed highly perceptive or just naturally suspicious. of course genre and mood consideration would matter as well. Pulling off an impossible stunt (physical or social) might be appropriate for a light hearted swashbuckler game than a grity game of police procedure and investigation.[/quote']

 

What I'd actually do in the situation described is decide what orders the guard had been given and then it would be unlikely anything that the orders actually addressed would work. Of course that would also depend on the personality traits of the guard.

 

A stone cold killer ordered to shoot dead anyone who approaches the guard point who is NOT wearing an orange jump suit is going to be difficult to get around, unless you have an orange jump suit. Same orders but someone who may not be so keen on killing, and you might be able to call their bluff. Thing is you don't KNOW until you try (which could have fatal results).

 

Now depending on GM style you might leave it to the dice or you might decide all the details in advance. I suppose it is fairest to actually decide in advance - giving the players the opportunity to gather information and so tip the odds in their favour, but you have not always got the time to decide all that in advance. Trouble is, at present all the system tells you iss if you succeeded or failed or (although the system does not really use margin of success) how much you succeeded or failed by.

 

It gives an INTENSITY of reaction but not a range of reactions. It would be nice to see that in 6th.

 

Oh, and one point about 6th. Social conflict is something much more likely to lead to interesting role playing than combat and should, IMO, get real space. We talk a lot about role playing but don't actually do much with the rule system to encourage it. Character creation is good for role playing goodness, with disadvantantages, but once the character is built the rules themselves don't really concentrate on social situations as much as they should IMO.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Oh' date=' and one point about 6th. Social conflict is something much more likely to lead to interesting role playing than combat and should, IMO, get real space. We talk a lot about role playing but don't actually do much with the rule system to encourage it. Character creation is good for role playing goodness, with disadvantantages, but once the character is built the rules themselves don't really concentrate on social situations as much as they should IMO.[/quote']

 

While I agree that an enhanced social conflict system is desirable, this is not "role playing". Role playing is playing your character's personality - strengths, weaknesses, quirks and all. It has nothing to do with the mechanical resolution of any type of conflict.

 

Social conflict can lack role playing entirely. "I'll use a Torch to the Groin, BA. That's a +4 modifier on the Interrogation Skill Chart. Oh, and I'll try to Befriend the Prisoner - that's another +2."

 

Physical combat can be very much influenced by role playing. "Yes, it would be way more effective for FireLad to attack IceMistress. But he's intimidated by her beauty and charm, and he's inexperienced in combat, so he attacks AsbestosMan instead, since he's the closest bad guy target."

[Sean Waters]

Re: Social Conflict

 

While I agree that an enhanced social conflict system is desirable, this is not "role playing". Role playing is playing your character's personality - strengths, weaknesses, quirks and all. It has nothing to do with the mechanical resolution of any type of conflict.

 

Social conflict can lack role playing entirely. "I'll use a Torch to the Groin, BA. That's a +4 modifier on the Interrogation Skill Chart. Oh, and I'll try to Befriend the Prisoner - that's another +2."

 

Physical combat can be very much influenced by role playing. "Yes, it would be way more effective for FireLad to attack IceMistress. But he's intimidated by her beauty and charm, and he's inexperienced in combat, so he attacks AsbestosMan instead, since he's the closest bad guy target."

 

 

A good point well made, but I'd still argue that social conflict carries with it a greater wealth of role playing opportunities, and it certainly does not carry LESS than combat...so should get equal billing in a nicely rounded game.

[StGrimblefig]

Re: Social Conflict

 

While I agree that an enhanced social conflict system is desirable' date=' this is not "role playing". Role playing is playing your character's personality - strengths, weaknesses, quirks and all. It has nothing to do with the mechanical resolution of any type of conflict.[/quote'] Remember that roleplaying games are a form of escapist entertainment, and as such allow people to play roles of people that are very different from themselves (or may not even be people at all). If that is so, then how does one play a person who has abilities that they do not have? I would venture a guess that the majority of gamers have never actually killed a person with a sword or firearm, yet they are not penalized for not knowing what they can and cannot do with a sword -- there are mechanics in the game that allow them to simulate such activities. Likewise, if a player is socially awkward except within a small group of similar friends, the game should not penalize that player for not knowing how to charm the pretty young desk clerk out of a specific room key, of convincing a bored guard that his choice of career should be reconsidered -- there should be a mechanic that allows that player to create a dramatic scene regardless of their own capabilities. Not every player is a master thespian, or even a passable actor.

 

Now, TUSk gave us the extended skill contest, which is a step in the right direction. But even that is just a couple of die rolls repeated until one side reaches a set number of successes -- unless the group and/or the GM make roleplaying the situation a priority, there need not be any. At least with physical combat, you are choosing maneuvers, which imply certain types of activities and easily lead to descriptive and dramatic action scenes.

 

Social conflict can lack role playing entirely. "I'll use a Torch to the Groin' date=' BA. That's a +4 modifier on the Interrogation Skill Chart. Oh, and I'll try to Befriend the Prisoner - that's another +2."[/quote'] Of course, there is no way to force someone to roleplay, but if the mechanics imply certain activities in their names, advantages/drawbacks, etc., then it at least it lends itself to dramatic description by the GM, even if the player can't or doesn't want to play it out. (btw. If I were GM and a player tried those two activities on the same prisoner and for the same roll of the dice, it would actually make it less likely to succeed (being rather contradictory tactics) -- but that's a GMs personal call)

[StGrimblefig]

Re: Social Conflict

 

Well, I don't like the idea of forcing physical violence just because the social route failed. It should still be the player's decision, based upon his or her knowledge of the character's psychology.

 

Rather, it is obvious that the character will be unable to use Social Skills to get the information out of this person until the character changes track. Temporary immunity to Seduction, Persuasion, Conversation, etc...only from that character, though the confidence should give the opponent bonuses in dealing with the other officers.

I didn't mean to imply that the character would be forced to use violence. It would depend upon the character in question, of course. Just that, having lost his Composure, it would be difficult for the character to maintain his cool in a stressful situation (i.e. it would probably be obvious to anyone observing that the character had lost the exchange). What "losing your cool" means depends on the character and the situation.