What skills are necessary for a trial?

[Ragitsu]

This includes both realistic trials and TV drama show trials that are usually more exciting.

[Nolgroth]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Oratory, Interrogation, KS: Law, PS: Trial Lawyer, high PRE

[Patriot]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Spurious logic.....CE: Lie to truth: AOE Courtroom

[Ragitsu]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Though it is not a skill, Luck seems handy, particularly because a good roll can result in a wholly new piece of evidence from out of nowhere or even a new witness. Is this a fair assessment of the trait's usefulness in a trial?

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

I think Nolgroth hit the nail on the head, myself.

[Rapier]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

PS: Lawyer

[blackkatt]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Well, personally I'd take:

 

ks - law

ps - lawyer

Criminology

maybe forensic medicine, depending on how much you want your lawyer to know

Persuasion

Conversation

Oratory

[Rapier]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

To each his own, obviously. But we've run across this topic a couple times a year every year for ever. What skills does it take to be a: Doctor, Scientist, Lawyer, Taxi Driver, Pharmacist, etc.

 

It is very easy to go crazy with a list of skills. Technically any college graduate should have:

 

KS: Economics

KS: Western Civilization

PS: Algebra

PS: English Grammar and Writing

KS: Major

KS: Minor

 

See where I'm going with this? It's very easy to say that any occupation should require a hundred or so points of skills, but that is a little intensive for their utility. Unless you are going for some really intensive in game courtroom drama (eg Law and Order Hero) a simple PS: Lawyer (and depending on your views as a GM, KS: The Law, Perk: Member of Bar) is plenty.

 

Some kind of PRE skill (eg Oratory, Persuasion) might be handy as a side skill that would be useful outside the courtroom.

[Ragitsu]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

How many rolls, and in what order, would they typically go in?

 

I'm trying to simulate a trial that is more than just one roll, or a pair of opposed rolls.

[The Suave]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

I would allow one relevant skill (Persuasion, Oratory, Interrogation, KS: Law) to be a complimentary skill roll to PS: Lawyer, depending on the situation (Closing comments, Questioning a witness, Citing a law, respectively). You could also do it the other way around (use PS: Lawyer as a complimentary skill roll to another relevant skill for the situation).

 

This is, of course, if you are actually roleplaying the courtroom scene (which I assume you are). Otherwise "You go into the courtroom, roll PS: Lawyer to see how it turns out."

[Utech]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

What sort of trial? Is this a matter of trying a murderer, a spy, a war criminal, an embezzler, a contested traffic ticket..?

[dmjalund]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

However you can have a law degree and be hopeless in front of a jury.

[Sean Waters]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Criminal Legal Resolution System

 

This is based on what I remember of the Villains and Vigilantes legal system

 

1. If the person accused of the crime is actually guilty, they start with a 8- chance of acquittal. If they are actually innocent they start with a 14- chance of acquittal.
   
2. Consider the strength of the evidence and apply a –4 to +4 modifier. Note that evidence may be false, manufactured or planted and such evidence may still apparently be compelling. Evidence includes eyewitness testimony*, forensic evidence** and admission evidence, as well as circumstantial evidence and sometimes even hearsay.
   
3. Consider the Judge and Jury. Generally this will not impose a penalty or a bonus, but some Judges might have a reputation as ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ imposing a +1 or –1 tot eh roll, and both Judge and Jury could be bribed, again imposing a bonus or penalty.
   
4. Consider the legal teams. The lead advocates each make a PS Lawyer roll, with any appropriate complementary skills, like Persuasion, PS Advocate, maybe even relevant ‘non lawyer’ skills – if the lawyer has SS: Biochemistry and DNA is in issue it may assist in presenting the evidence. Treat the result as a complementary skill total as a bonus or penalty. Remember ‘Skill Roll’ is a metagame concept – no one knows what a lawyers skill level actually is – previous good or badd results may be a matter of luck.
   
5. Finally look at any other surrounding circumstances and apply a relevant bonus or penalty. If CBS just ran a two hour special, “Prostitute Murderer’s Trial Starts Tomorrow – An In-Depth Review of the Evidence – Will he Escape Justice?”, you may be starting a few points down.
   

Note that if you spend more money that MAY buy you a better lawyer (but just because a lawyer doesn’t charge a lot does not mean that they are not a good lawyer) but, more importantly, it may mean that you have more resources to investigate and plan the trial, which can affect bonuses or penalties in other areas. Generally the state will spend quite a bit on a big trial, but less on less ‘important’ offences or defendants – the amount the defence spends depends on available resources.

 

Now you simply total the bonuses and penalties and make a roll. The role played actions of the characters, both in Court and outside in the collection and investigation of evidence should have considerable impact.

 

Simples.

 

 

*You can decide on how well a witness comes across by making a PRE roll, or a PRE skill roll (usually conversation, acting or persuasion) and treating the result as a complementary skill roll: prosecution witnesses impose a penalty unless they blow the roll, defence witnesses grant a bonus. Only do this for important witnesses – a lot of evidence in trials may be necessary but relatively uncontentious. Modify this as appropriate – most people are not good liars and should get a penalty if they are lying – but bear in mind what the witness is saying might not be actually TRUE, but they could be convinced that it is, so they are not lying as far as they are concerned. This may especially be the case with identification evidence.

 

**Similarly you can use investigation or scientific skills to determine how much weight is put in any given piece of evidence, like fingerprints or DNA, or to trace additional witnesses or evidence, or appropriate skills to plant or remove evidence.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

To me, this depends a lot on the amount of attention you want to pay to the trial in your game. In many games, this will be a minor area at best, and is probably resolved with a bit of role playing and a single skill roll. This very simple resolution system is, to me, a key reason why many source material examples work poorly in a game. The Star Trek episodes dealing with a medical challenge, for example, are similar to this legal issue in that they would typically be resolved with a single roll.

 

If I wanted these to take more of a center stage in a game, I would want a more robust resolution system. We have a very robust, step by step combat system to resolve physical conflict. If I wanted a game which focused on, say, courtroom drama, I'd want a much more robust, step by step system for skills, and resolving conflict in, the legal system. PS: Lawyer would no longer cut it. Is the character a litigator? In what area(s) of law does he focus? in a Supers game, KS Magic is pretty much the Wizard skill. But in many fantasy games, KS: [type of] Magic is much more common. Skills in law would expand similarly in a legal-focused game.

 

The conflict resolution system would be more difficult to design, but I would expect it to focus on knowledge skills (finding key case precedents and obscure facts of law; utilizing the procedural issues before the court to best effect, etc.) and interaction skills (to influence the judge, the jury, witnesses and even the other side and their counsel). It would have many steps, with the advantage shifting back and forth between the sides. Rather than a single skill roll resolving a trial, a roll might be made at each stage, so I would make a roll after questioning my witness, and my opponent would roll after cross-examination. A more detailed system might even carry rolls at every key question.

 

The exact methodology would be a matter for detailed design, but the intent would be to create a more robust system where each roll impacts the outcome a bit, much like each attack impacts, but does not resolve, physical combat.

 

In such a game, I might well reduce physical combat to a simple skill vs skill roll, rather than use the more robust combat system, in order to de-emphasize the roll of combat in the game. The focus would be on the legal battles, not bar fights or gunplay, just like the typical Supers or Dark CHampions game focuses on combat (with a robust resolution system) and not on medical or legal challenges (which are resolved in a much less detailed manner).

[Marcus Impudite]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

The bare-bones minimum to be a lawyer in my games:

 

Fringe Benefit: Licence to Practice Law

KS: Law 11-

PS: Lawyer 11-

 

For one of the better lawyers, you'll want the following at the least:

 

+5 PRE

Fringe Benefit: Licence to Practice Law

Interrogation

KS: Law (INT roll)

Oratory

Persuasion

PS: Lawyer (PRE roll)

[Lucius]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

However you can have a law degree and be hopeless in front of a jury.

 

But still useful behind the scenes, researching precedents, selecting and contacting expert witnesses, sifting evidence, etc.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Packing a tennis racket and a suitcase on the palindromedary

[Rapier]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

I'm sure you considered this, but I feel it necessary to mention.

 

Way back in the day I was part of a ShadowRun game. One player just LOVED the entire concept of Deckers. He ALWAYS played a Decker. The problem with the Decker was that when it was time for him to do his thing (like opening a security door) he would dive into the net and spend an entire game session travelling through cyberspace to unlock a door. Everyone else kind of sat around and twiddled our thumbs. It was NOT fun. To allow a single player to so dominate an entire session (regardless of the importance of the task or outcome) is, simply, bad story telling.

 

I'm certain you've considered this, but devoting an entire game session (or even multiple game sessions) to a single players involvement in a trial might be unsatisfying for the rest of the group. All of these skills would be nice and useful and all, but using them in conjunction in some kind of trial setting, might be best handled over email and then disseminated to the rest of the group.

[Ragitsu]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Excuse me, Rapier, but it is a little presumptuous to state that,

 

To allow a single player to so dominate an entire session (regardless of the importance of the task or outcome) is, simply, bad story telling.

I have played, and even game mastered, sessions where one player character's plot development took center stage, and the other players did not lead a revolt against the GM. Just as it is possible to run a session where the typical ensemble cast formula does not result in a stellar experience, it is possible to run one where the opposite is true.

 

Oh, and do keep in mind the other player characters aren't exactly useless in a trial. They too have ways to contribute beyond merely sitting in their designated seats.

 

Also, we are are part of a hobby that encourages creativity and thinking outside the box. I would appreciate it if you did not needlessly downplay a certain type of gaming .

 

---

 

Criminal Legal Resolution System

 

This is based on what I remember of the Villains and Vigilantes legal system

 

1. If the person accused of the crime is actually guilty, they start with a 8- chance of acquittal. If they are actually innocent they start with a 14- chance of acquittal.
   
2. Consider the strength of the evidence and apply a –4 to +4 modifier. Note that evidence may be false, manufactured or planted and such evidence may still apparently be compelling. Evidence includes eyewitness testimony*, forensic evidence** and admission evidence, as well as circumstantial evidence and sometimes even hearsay.
   
3. Consider the Judge and Jury. Generally this will not impose a penalty or a bonus, but some Judges might have a reputation as ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ imposing a +1 or –1 tot eh roll, and both Judge and Jury could be bribed, again imposing a bonus or penalty.
   
4. Consider the legal teams. The lead advocates each make a PS Lawyer roll, with any appropriate complementary skills, like Persuasion, PS Advocate, maybe even relevant ‘non lawyer’ skills – if the lawyer has SS: Biochemistry and DNA is in issue it may assist in presenting the evidence. Treat the result as a complementary skill total as a bonus or penalty. Remember ‘Skill Roll’ is a metagame concept – no one knows what a lawyers skill level actually is – previous good or badd results may be a matter of luck.
   
5. Finally look at any other surrounding circumstances and apply a relevant bonus or penalty. If CBS just ran a two hour special, “Prostitute Murderer’s Trial Starts Tomorrow – An In-Depth Review of the Evidence – Will he Escape Justice?”, you may be starting a few points down.
   

Note that if you spend more money that MAY buy you a better lawyer (but just because a lawyer doesn’t charge a lot does not mean that they are not a good lawyer) but, more importantly, it may mean that you have more resources to investigate and plan the trial, which can affect bonuses or penalties in other areas. Generally the state will spend quite a bit on a big trial, but less on less ‘important’ offences or defendants – the amount the defence spends depends on available resources.

 

Now you simply total the bonuses and penalties and make a roll. The role played actions of the characters, both in Court and outside in the collection and investigation of evidence should have considerable impact.

 

Simples.

 

 

*You can decide on how well a witness comes across by making a PRE roll, or a PRE skill roll (usually conversation, acting or persuasion) and treating the result as a complementary skill roll: prosecution witnesses impose a penalty unless they blow the roll, defence witnesses grant a bonus. Only do this for important witnesses – a lot of evidence in trials may be necessary but relatively uncontentious. Modify this as appropriate – most people are not good liars and should get a penalty if they are lying – but bear in mind what the witness is saying might not be actually TRUE, but they could be convinced that it is, so they are not lying as far as they are concerned. This may especially be the case with identification evidence.

 

**Similarly you can use investigation or scientific skills to determine how much weight is put in any given piece of evidence, like fingerprints or DNA, or to trace additional witnesses or evidence, or appropriate skills to plant or remove evidence.

 

This is very interesting stuff. Would you say this is indicative of a mostly realistic sort of proceeding, or could it also handle comic book trials (where it seems villains are always getting out early)?

[Rapier]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

Excuse me' date=' [b']Rapier[/b], but it is a little presumptuous to state that,

 

I have played, and even game mastered, sessions where one player character's plot development took center stage, and the other players did not lead a revolt against the GM. Just as it is possible to run a session where the typical ensemble cast formula does not result in a stellar experience, it is possible to run one where the opposite is true.

 

Oh, and do keep in mind the other player characters aren't exactly useless in a trial. They too have ways to contribute beyond merely sitting in their designated seats.

 

Also, we are are part of a hobby that encourages creativity and thinking outside the box. I would appreciate it if you did not needlessly downplay a certain type of gaming .

 

Nope, sorry. Not at all presumptuous. And we are not talking about a particular plot line dear to a particular character taking center stage. I'm talking about one players actions dominating play to the exclusion of all other players, which forces the rest of the players to sit around with absolutely nothing invested in the game. That IS bad story-telling and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise.

[megaplayboy]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

KS: Law, PS: Trial Lawyer, Proficiency or familiarity with Forensics and Criminology(if you're doing criminal law), license to practice in the jurisdiction, Persuasion, Oratory, Interrogation and Conversation are all helpful. Deduction, specialized knowledges relating to the facts of the case or your area of practice expertise. Rep bonuses and press contacts, a contact with your own investigator(if you're doing defense or private practice), or the police investigator. If you're just doing it shorthand, I'd say KS: law, PS: Trial lawyer and persuasion would do a pretty good job of it.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

I have to agree with Rapier on this one Ragitsu. If the players are playing Daredevil, Hulk, Wolverine, and Spiderman, and the whole session is nothing but trial, what is everyone other than DD doing to "contribute beyond merely sitting in their designated seats"?

 

"Spiderman (in secret ID of course): I take a picture.

GM: Cameras aren't allowed in most courtrooms.

Hulk: I try to control my temper while listening to the horrible lies being told about whoever.

Wolverine: I'm leaving."

 

Sounds like fun for the whole group.

[dmjalund]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

1) Hulk becomes Bruce Banner and gets involved with gathering forensics

2) Wolverine literally smells out clues - and unofficially interrogates witnesses

3) Spidey uses reporter contacts to unearth other useful information

 

- just think of the PI that helps out Ironside - and replace him with your other characters

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

But still useful behind the scenes' date=' researching precedents, selecting and contacting expert witnesses, sifting evidence, etc.[/quote']

 

Exactly - not every lawyer is a litigator. If the game doesn't focus on legal matters, assuming PS: Lawyer covers all skills and abilities needed to practice every type of law, including litigation, works fine. If you want a more granular structure because law will be more important, then you would have real estate law, family law, corporate and commercial law, tax law, criminal law, personal injury law, and numerous other specialties and subspecialties. Within these knowledge areas, one might be a planner, a litigator, a negotiator or focus on any other aspect of a legal practice. There are entire firms of lawyers that handle only one area of the law.

 

But if we're dealing with the typical (not legal-focused) cinematic game, being "a lawyer" is sufficient to cover all these broad areas.

 

Excuse me' date=' [b']Rapier[/b], but it is a little presumptuous to state that,

 

I have played, and even game mastered, sessions where one player character's plot development took center stage, and the other players did not lead a revolt against the GM. Just as it is possible to run a session where the typical ensemble cast formula does not result in a stellar experience, it is possible to run one where the opposite is true.

 

Oh, and do keep in mind the other player characters aren't exactly useless in a trial. They too have ways to contribute beyond merely sitting in their designated seats.

 

Also, we are are part of a hobby that encourages creativity and thinking outside the box. I would appreciate it if you did not needlessly downplay a certain type of gaming .

 

Hear hear. There's not much point players having detailed backgrounds for their characters if those backgrounds never come up in play. I would suggest that, if we will never see a legal proceeding, even making the characters pay for PS: Lawyer 15- may well be an excessive cost for the utility of the skill.

 

This is very interesting stuff. Would you say this is indicative of a mostly realistic sort of proceeding' date=' or could it also handle comic book trials (where it seems villains are always getting out early)?[/quote']

 

This would be pretty comic booky, IMO, given it was adapted from the Villains and Vigelantes game. Definitely a quick & dirty "resolve the trail" sys5tem.

 

Nope' date=' sorry. Not at all presumptuous. And we are not talking about a particular plot line dear to a particular character taking center stage. I'm talking about one players actions dominating play to the exclusion of all other players, which forces the rest of the players to sit around with absolutely nothing invested in the game. That IS bad story-telling and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise.[/quote']

 

So, whne my character's Hunted shows up, or his DNPC, or some non-complication aspect of his background, and my character takes center stage, that's a bad game? You seem to assume the only choices are "only one character has anything to do" or "just focus on stuff everyone'e character is constructed around". You are missing a huge middle ground. In many great games, the focus shifts from one character to another in the central role, with others still participating. In others, players just rattle off a quick backstory for their character without a lot of effort, because it will never come up in play, as that would focus on my character and be "unfair" to the other characters.

 

1) Hulk becomes Bruce Banner and gets involved with gathering forensics

2) Wolverine literally smells out clues - and unofficially interrogates witnesses

3) Spidey uses reporter contacts to unearth other useful information

 

- just think of the PI that helps out Ironside - and replace him with your other characters

 

The point I would make in this regard is that the GM should be thinking of how the other characters can be useful and involved in the scenario, even though it focuses on one character's special skill set. The players also need to exercise a little creativity in approaching situations that can't be successfully resolved by attacking it until it falls down. And maybe consider characters who have abilities that aren't just about combat.

 

To take the list of characters suggested, if we can't use DD's legal skills, I guess we can't have any scenarios that need a scientist (Banner), media connections or photography (Spidey) or tracking skills (Wolvy) since the other characters can't contribute there either, right? So we may as well spend all our points on combat, since we'll all be able to do that and it's the only skill set we can be confident everyone will possess. We can use those Everyman Skills for PS: Lawyer, PS: Scientist, PS: Photographer and PS: Tracker, but that will just be backstory and have no impact on the game.

 

Oh, and we can never have an opponent so tough that DD's billy club can't lay him out, otherwise his player just sits back being bored and frustrated as the stronger combatants have all the fun. What an idiot spending all those points on things that don't help him in combat - that's all the game is about, right?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

1) Hulk becomes Bruce Banner and gets involved with gathering forensics

2) Wolverine literally smells out clues - and unofficially interrogates witnesses

3) Spidey uses reporter contacts to unearth other useful information

 

- just think of the PI that helps out Ironside - and replace him with your other characters

None of which allows any participation in the 4 hour court room drama that takes up most of a game session.

 

There is a difference between a character "taking center stage" and a character having all the action/the only interaction for a solid hour of game play. Rapier was very specifically refering to the latter and even gave an example to illustrate what he meant. He never said there was no middle ground. He said to beware one extreme and 2 people jumped down his throat acting like he somehow implied all players must have the exact same amount of focus/action/interaction or something isn't fair. You're both arguing against things he never said.

 

EDIT:

I'm sure you considered this, but I feel it necessary to mention.

 

Way back in the day I was part of a ShadowRun game. One player just LOVED the entire concept of Deckers. He ALWAYS played a Decker. The problem with the Decker was that when it was time for him to do his thing (like opening a security door) he would dive into the net and spend an entire game session travelling through cyberspace to unlock a door. Everyone else kind of sat around and twiddled our thumbs. It was NOT fun. To allow a single player to so dominate an entire session (regardless of the importance of the task or outcome) is, simply, bad story telling.

 

I'm certain you've considered this, but devoting an entire game session (or even multiple game sessions) to a single players involvement in a trial might be unsatisfying for the rest of the group. All of these skills would be nice and useful and all, but using them in conjunction in some kind of trial setting, might be best handled over email and then disseminated to the rest of the group.

Emphasis added by me. This is clearly talking about a player having all action to the detrimant of the others. Not simple "being the focus of" or "taking center stage" in a certain story arch. Note the use of words like might. Can you honestly not see a difference between "A single player dominating an entire session" and "an adventure focusing on a certain PC"?

[Sean Waters]

Re: What skills are necessary for a trial?

 

........................

 

This is very interesting stuff. Would you say this is indicative of a mostly realistic sort of proceeding, or could it also handle comic book trials (where it seems villains are always getting out early)?

 

 

Well you could use it in any setting - thing about supervillains is that they often have the ability to change the mind of a witness - or even get rid of them - or steal a piece of evidence, or plant it - that more realistic characters can not. That could be why they get off at trial so often

 

It might be interesting to have the PCs involved in witness protection, or tracing or recovering evidence - what they do might not be central to the trial but would certainly have a major influence. On the one hand you could resolve a trial with a single roll (making the whole process quick and quite 'background'), but on the other the PCs could be involved in a number of ways - up to and including conducting the trial itself.

 

It seems like a reasonably balanced way to make a decision as to the outcome of a trial, if the outcome itself is not already written as a plot device.