Complementary Social Skills

[Sean Waters]

OK, long post, sorry about that, but you'll get over it.

 

 

Preamble

 

 

One issue that I perceive with the system that Hero uses to moderate social interaction is that there seems to be no way to take into account the base personality of the character, except by way of their Presence or Psychological Complications, which are blunt tools: some people can use social interaction skills effectively when they are in the right (or are convinced they are), and it does not matter whether they are trying to convince a crowd, or a person – they just tell it better when they believe they have the truth behind them, and that is irrespective of the particular social skill they are using.

 

 

Another issue is that there seems to be no real way for a character to resist attempts at social interaction, whereas we all know some people who are stubborn and can not be forced into anything, but may be persuaded by a well reasoned argument, or an appeal to their better nature. A system that takes into account the attitudes of the target can encourage a more thoughtful approach to social interaction.

 

 

This system does not replace dice rolls, or make any result certain, but it does load the odds in favour of an appropriate outcome.

 

 

Complementary Social Skills (CSSs)

 

 

There are a number of social skills that can be used as complementary skills to determine the outcome of social situations. They are NOT used on their own, but can assist in some situations, or help to resist the influence of others and are useful ways of adding nuance to the personality of a character. Each skill is either active (i.e. you use it when you make a relevant social interaction attempt) or defensive (i.e. you use it when an attempt is made against you).

 

 

You might have CSSs because of your personality or because of training.

 

 

General Rules

 

 

You can use as many CSSs as apply to the situation, with the permission of the GM The GM should assess whether a CSS applies; it can be difficult, but by no means impossible, to use Social Aggression with an attempt at being charming. The GM may make a hidden roll where appropriate for defensive CSSs; it can be a bit obvious if you ask for a Social Perception roll – it tells the player that the character using a social skill against them is using deception. If a social interaction attempt fails because of a CSS roll then it can also be useful to know WHY the attempt failed: if you are trying to fool someone who sees through your deception because they are particularly socially perceptive, they are less likely to trust you next time.

 

 

Repeat attempts to socially influence the target should generally use the same complimentary modifier without re-rolling,unless there is a significant intervening event.

 

 

You do not have to buy CSSs as they are all considered to be Everyman Skills, but you can buy levels in CSSs, at 1 point per point.

 

 

Special Rules

 

 

The GM or player can define any additional CSSs they see a need for (you might want a character who reacts badly to flattery and compliments or inappropriate appeals to imagined camaraderie, and so propose a defensive Social Distance CSS), but should be careful they are no broader than the examples given below. New CSSs should always be defined as 'Social Something' to make it clear that they are CSSs.

 

 

You never HAVE to use positive CSSs, but you can if you want to (generally you will want to use them). When you do decide to use the CSS, you have to abide by the result. Always remember that you can simply consent to a Social interaction attempt, which will not require a roll at all, but if you do decide to make it a contest you should abide by the result.

 

 

If you roll and succeed (the base target is always 11, and is never modified, and the roll is never modified, except by CSSs), you get +1 to your attempt, or apply a -1 to the other person's attempt against you. For each 2 points you make the roll by, you add an additional +1, or the opponent takes an additional -1.

 

 

If you FAIL the roll then you get -1 on your attempt or your opponent gets +1 on theirs. For each 2 points you fail by you get an additional -1 or the opponent gets and additional +1.

 

 

Although CSSs are Everyman skills, you can not use them unless you have at least one level (positive or negative) in that skill.

 

 

Example CSSs

 

 

1. Social Deception Active – can help a social interaction attempt when an important part of that interaction is based on a deception, specifically something the character knows or believes is not true. The character has a talent for lying.
   
2. Social Perception Defensive – can help when an attempt is being made to influence you and an important part of it is a bluff or lie, and the person making the attempt knows that they are not telling the truth.
   
3. Social Aggression Active – can help a social situation where an important part of the interaction is based on intimidating the other person.
   
4. Social Resilience Defensive – can help resist a social influence attempt based on intimidation. The character is hard to bully.
   
5. Social Honesty Active – can help a social interaction attempt where the character is saying something that they know or believe to be true and convincing the other party of that is an important part of the attempt.
   
6. Social Deduction Defensive – can assist when there is a hidden motive in the social interaction attempt. There may well be an overlap with social perception, and this may need to be carefully adjudicated.
   
7. Social Preparation Active – can help a social situation where the character has had time to prepare and marshal their arguments. The GM may limit the number of CSSs based on the opportunity to prepare and the resources available to do so.
   
8. Social Reaction Defensive – can help a social situation where the character has to react quickly to a new or changing situation.
   
9. Social Temptation Active – this can assist an attempt when you are trying to influence someone based on bribery i.e. where the target stands to gain something. There is obviously a lot of overlap with the Bribery skill, but is often subtler than an all out offer of favours.
   
10. Social Morality Defensive – this can assist when you are the subject of an attempt to make you act against a principle that you hold.
    

 

Optional Rules

As a way of defining a personality, you can also buy negative CSSs. For each negative CSS you take you get one character point back.

 

 

You can not usually have both positive and negative CSSs in the same category unless the GM gives you permission (and you'll be needing a DAMN good reason). An exception may be for something like Social Patriotism. In that case, you may react well to appeals to a patriotic cause that you agree with, but badly to one you disagree with. In that case, you choose a level of CSS, and do not receive points, or spend them. When the appeal is to the cause you identify with, you are more likely to concede, and the points will improve your opponent's chance of influencing you, whereas when the appeal is against your cause, your opponent will suffer your result as a penalty. For example if you are playing a game involving characters embroiled in the war between England and the Dutch during the reign of King James II, you might be an English marine with Social Patriotism (England); you will involve yourself in a scheme to further the cause of the English nation whereas you will reject a similar proposal that would harm your cause or further the cause of your enemy. A CSS of this nature is an excellent way to define character traits, but the GM should approve any such CSS and the number of points in it. A clever character may be able to couch a request or demand in such a way as to avoid the CSS becoming relevant. It can encourage a bit of research on the person you are trying to influence. It can also make a skill like Analyse (Personality traits) useful, giving you an idea of the prejudices of your intended target before you make your final approach.

 

 

You always have to use negative CSSs in a situation where they apply. They can be useful for creating a character who is gullible, or easily intimidated, or useless at telling a lie, or particularly easily influenced if you hit their 'hot button'. You might, for example, create a character who is not believed especially when telling the truth, like the oracle Cassandra, with negative Social Honesty. That does not mean that she is dishonest, but does mean that she is not likely to be able to persuade someone that what she says is true.

 

 

Footnote

 

 

Some players do not like the idea of their characters being influenced by social interaction skills at all. The idea of this proposal is that, at least in part, if they want a character who is hard to bully, or fool, they can build a character like that. My view is that this is a role playing game and if someone comes to your character with a proposal that the character finds attractive or advantageous, then it is just good role playing to go along with it. We've argued in the past about, for example, a character with a code against killing being immune to any social interaction attempts to make him kill someone, and I agree it should be almost impossible, but that does not invalidate the use of a system that can influence characters to do some things that they might not otherwise have done; the social interaction is with the character, not the player, and they are not the same, even if the character is based on the player. The player is not in that situation, the character is.

 

 

This is not meant to replace psychological limitations, but does allow for a much finer degree of control over how psychology and personality works in social situations.

 

 

Even if the group does not subscribe to the idea that social skills can affect player characters, this is a potentially useful tool for the GM faced with a player whose character invariably bullies, or charms, their way through social situations – eventually they will run into someone against whom that tactic is not effective (of course the GM could just decide that the target will not respond to a particular overture, but that can seem a bit arbitrary). It will pay to know your target, or pick your target, and moderate your approach, rather than just pile in with your Persuasion 17-.

[Christopher]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

One issue that I perceive with the system that Hero uses to moderate social interaction is that there seems to be no way to take into account the base personality of the character' date=' except by way of their Presence or Psychological Complications, which are blunt tools: some people can use social interaction skills effectively when they are in the right (or are convinced they are), and it does not matter whether they are trying to convince a crowd, or a person – they just tell it better when they believe they have the truth behind them, and that is irrespective of the particular social skill they are using.[/quote']

RAW differntiates between Oratory (crowd manipulation) and dual way interaction Skills. There are more detailed aproaches and the social combat rules in the APG II.

Also you can just take every one of the Presence Attack Modifiers and translate them +/-1d6 to +/-1 into a Interaction modifier. Plenty of ideas in there.

 

Another issue is that there seems to be no real way for a character to resist attempts at social interaction' date=' whereas we all know some people who are stubborn and can not be forced into anything, but may be persuaded by a well reasoned argument, or an appeal to their better nature. A system that takes into account the attitudes of the target can encourage a more thoughtful approach to social interaction.[/quote']

What about the Ego Roll? What about the modifiers the GM can give (things like "wants to believe" can be equally applied for "hard to bully, but easy to persuade"). Also you can just take 0-Points Complications to define such things. Or limited EGO.

 

 

The one thing I agree on, is that the Hero Skill System misses both granularity and Detail. As I see it it was designed to be that way (after all it focuses on being generic and having "cinematic realism").

Your approach certainly adds that. Or at the very least gives the existing bonuses/penalties a rules construct and takes them out of GM hands, so it's not so much a question of the GM if a certain factor aplies.

 

Your solution will primarily lead to:

More bookkeeping (CSS; results of the Rolls).

More Rolls (up to half a dozen instead of one).

Tendency towards the average. The higher the overall number of dice, the lesser the chance to get really high or really low end results.

But certainly also a way more granulary interaction simulation.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

RAW differntiates between Oratory (crowd manipulation) and dual way interaction Skills. There are more detailed aproaches and the social combat rules in the APG II.

Also you can just take every one of the Presence Attack Modifiers and translate them +/-1d6 to +/-1 into a Interaction modifier. Plenty of ideas in there.[/qsuote]

 

Yes indeed: the rules differentiate between oratory and persuasion, crowd/one to one, but don't give a straightforward way to, for example, model a religious fanatic who is persuasive to both crowds and individuals when on his chosen topic. You CAN do it: as you say take PRE and apply modifiers, but the build is more complicated: this seems more straightforward.

 

 

What about the Ego Roll? What about the modifiers the GM can give (things like "wants to believe" can be equally applied for "hard to bully' date=' but easy to persuade"). Also you can just take 0-Points Complications to define such things. Or limited EGO.[/quote']

 

I'm not sure that EGO rolls make sense in situations where, for example, you are being fooled into doing something (an INT roll may be more appropriate there?). It does not seem like a useful solution because you have the issue of a relatively messy build. I'm not overly enamoured of the way 6e 'does' social interaction.

 

 

The one thing I agree on, is that the Hero Skill System misses both granularity and Detail. As I see it it was designed to be that way (after all it focuses on being generic and having "cinematic realism").

Your approach certainly adds that. Or at the very least gives the existing bonuses/penalties a rules construct and takes them out of GM hands, so it's not so much a question of the GM if a certain factor aplies.

 

Hmm. There are plenty of dce rolls in combat and no one moans about that. There is an enormous amount of granularity and detail. Why should that be cinematic for defeating someone in fisticuffs, but not for defeating someone with wordplay? I'm not saying this is a 'best' solution, but I do think it allows you to define a character to a good degree (one of the cornerstones of Hero) and leaves you with a relatively straightforward and familiar mechanic for social interaction resolution.

 

Your solution will primarily lead to:

More bookkeeping (CSS; results of the Rolls).

More Rolls (up to half a dozen instead of one).

Tendency towards the average. The higher the overall number of dice, the lesser the chance to get really high or really low end results.

But certainly also a way more granulary interaction simulation.

 

There is certainly more book keeping in character creation, but the results are still 'all or nothing' - a success based result is not part of this proposal (but give me time ), so extra bookkeeping in game should be limited to carrying over the result of a complementary skill roll.

 

There is more dice rolling, but whether that is a good thing or a bad thing depends on the importance you attach to social interaction - as mentioned above, physical combat uses an awful lot of dice and dice rolls, and most people accept that as it is a central and important part of many games that needs a lot of focus. If social interaction is a central part of your game maybe we should be looking at more than a single roll.

 

There will be a tendency toward the average (I assume - I have not woked it out) but also the possibility of even more extreme results. You COULD see that as representative of reality, at least cinematic reality - generally people act as expected, but sometimes do something crazy.

 

What I like about the idea is that you can build a character more exactly. Characters will never be entirely predictable in a given situation, but over the course of a career, should conform to patterns.

 

One other thing: complications are often a very rough way of sketching out a personality. They rely on 3d6 rolls of 8-, 11- or 14-, and there are huge differences between those values. This seems a better way to define a character's foibles, which is the point you closed with

 

Thank you for reading and commenting!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

You COULD do much the same thing with a simple modifier: double the cost (2 point sper point) and have a fixed modifer to the base roll rather than a complementary skill roll (assuming you allow 'negative skills' at the same cost as 'positive' ones). Seems a bit mechanical but removes the need for extra dice rolls and book keeping.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Couldn't resistance be used to "resist" Charm, Interrogation, and other skills?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Couldn't resistance be used to "resist" Charm' date=' Interrogation, and other skills?[/quote']

 

That would require a house rule anyway, although resistance is a decent precedent, but part of my issue with the whole thing is that EGO does not seem like a good 'universal' way to resist social interaction. The system defines EGO as mental strength and strength of will. That may be fine for resisting overt interrogation, for example you have your arm twisted but refuse to give in. It does not sound like it would work at all for 'Columbo interrogation' - where you say something that seems innocuous but that in fact gives away more than you intended. That seems to bear no relation at all to strength of will.

 

Also I'm not happy about specific defences to specific skills. The idea of this is to broaden the arena of social interaction, so that you are not just resistant to, say, persuasion, you are resistant to cajoling, whether the skill used is interrogation, bribery, charm, oratory or persuasion or whatever.

 

Mind you something analagous to resistance could be used as a fixed modifier, but I do feel that is a bit mechanical. I think this approach gives more flavour and savour to social interaction: a single dice roll can seem a bit anti-climactic for what is, or should be, one of the most important areas of the game.

[Christopher]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

I'm not sure that EGO rolls make sense in situations where' date=' for example, you are being fooled into doing something (an INT roll may be more appropriate there?). It does not seem like a useful solution because you have the issue of a relatively messy build. I'm not overly enamoured of the way 6e 'does' social interaction.[/quote']

The INT and Knowledge determines how hard the lie is to believe (ever tried lying to about History to a History teacher or somebody who was there?). Ego is the right Stat, because it is about resisting the atempt. Wich asume you are even trying to resist.

The attacker is trying to unermine your resolve to be at your position. He can do this with a speech and Peer Pressure (Oratory), Good argumentation (Persuasion), brute Force (Interogation) or by presenting a self you would like to follow wherever he goes (charm).

 

Hmm. There are plenty of dce rolls in combat and no one moans about that. There is an enormous amount of granularity and detail. Why should that be cinematic for defeating someone in fisticuffs' date=' but not for defeating someone with wordplay? I'm not saying this is a 'best' solution, but I do think it allows you to define a character to a good degree (one of the cornerstones of Hero) and leaves you with a relatively straightforward and familiar mechanic for social interaction resolution.[/quote']

I meant: A fight needs one OCV Roll, one Damage Roll and (perhaps) a Knockback Roll.

Your original approach could need up to a half dozen (the skill + 5 CSS) per action.

 

Couldn't resistance be used to "resist" Charm' date=' Interrogation, and other skills?[/quote']

Yes, there are rules regaring this next the the Talent itself (6E1 114).

And you can always write up a 0 Point Complication as -1 to insulting interaction Rolls.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

The INT and Knowledge determines how hard the lie is to believe (ever tried lying to about History to a History teacher or somebody who was there?). Ego is the right Stat, because it is about resisting the atempt. Wich asume you are even trying to resist.

The attacker is trying to unermine your resolve to be at your position. He can do this with a speech and Peer Pressure (Oratory), Good argumentation (Persuasion), brute Force (Interogation) or by presenting a self you would like to follow wherever he goes (charm).

 

It is an interesting point that you would only resist social interaction skills where there is an outcome that you do not want, so you would always be involved in a battle of wills. I do not necessarily see it that way though. Your Oratory could be all about persuading a crowd to your cause with reasoned arguments, your interrogation could be all about making friends and lulling someone into a false sense of security then getting them to tell you things that seem unimportant individually but build a picture overall: you might know that an NPC is trying to get you to tell him the location of the witness you've got stashed, but your character does not necesarily know that. As far as they are concerned someone just walked up, asked for a light and got chatting.

 

Logically, if the target of the social interaction attempt is unaware that they are being unobtrusively pumped for information, they are not going to be resisting. Before they can think about resisting they have to realise what sort of situation they are in. It is different if the NPC has you strapped to a chair and is honing a straight razor on a strop and outright demanding the information - sure that is a battle of wills, or rather a battle of will, yours.

 

I do think that our aproach is too simplistic. Which leads to...

 

 

I meant: A fight needs one OCV Roll, one Damage Roll and (perhaps) a Knockback Roll.

Your original approach could need up to a half dozen (the skill + 5 CSS) per action.

 

That is one attack, and it is rare that you one-shot an opponent unless they are vastly inferior or taken by surprise, so you have to make those rolls three maybe four times before the physical combat is over, leaving you with at least six rolls, maybe up to 12, and a fair amount of subsidiary calculation. At present the whole of 'social combat' is done with a single roll.

[Tasha]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

How about using the completely official rules presented in "The Ultimate Skill" currently known as Hero System Skills (same book, same page layout with a couple of minor changes).

 

TUS/HSS pg 67 "In most cases the “resistance roll” is an EGO Roll, but it could be a PRE Roll, a roll with an appropriate Skill, a PER Roll, or the like. The modifiers for Interaction Skills (pages 37-39) can apply to either roll, as the GM sees fit"

 

There's also a nice table that gives guidelines for how a great roll will effect the target.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Hero is nothing if not flexible, and you can always decide to use a different characteristic, but I'm suggesting that the characteristics that we could potentially use (PRE, INT, EGO or maybe, sometimes, an interaction skill of your own) only cover a really small slice of the emotional spectrum: someone could be strong in all three but be a sucker for a pretty face, and Complications are a bit of a blunt tool for deciding how that interacts with social skills.

 

IIRC interaction 'resistance' is a 6e concept, meaning that some interaction skills are much less likely to succeed than they were in 5e and, interestingly, at least as far as the normal rule book goes, not every interaction skill has a 'resistance' to apply: for example conversation does not. Of course you can house rule one in, but it is not part of the rules.

 

So there does not seem to be a universal approach to interaction skills. I'm sure it is thought through better in the Skills book, but not everyone has that.

[Duane From RI]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

:think:This is a great topic. I need more time to think and to review the APGII stuff. One thing I like a ton from APGII is the Composure stat. Composure is the ability to keep thinking straight. It doesn't imply any particular personality, it simply recognizes that some people get confused, flustered or otherwise effed in the head faster than others.

I will say that anything that can increase the "perceived" value of pure interaction scenes would be useful to any roleplaying game. The truth is that cajoling the Duke as his seneschal hates your guts and his daughter is making eyes at you and the serving wench is a assassin looking for an opportunity shouldn't be resolved with one round of die rolls. However there has got to be a much better solution than making a giant cross matrix of single die rolls.

I must think:think:

[Tasha]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Hero is nothing if not flexible, and you can always decide to use a different characteristic, but I'm suggesting that the characteristics that we could potentially use (PRE, INT, EGO or maybe, sometimes, an interaction skill of your own) only cover a really small slice of the emotional spectrum: someone could be strong in all three but be a sucker for a pretty face, and Complications are a bit of a blunt tool for deciding how that interacts with social skills.

 

IIRC interaction 'resistance' is a 6e concept, meaning that some interaction skills are much less likely to succeed than they were in 5e and, interestingly, at least as far as the normal rule book goes, not every interaction skill has a 'resistance' to apply: for example conversation does not. Of course you can house rule one in, but it is not part of the rules.

 

So there does not seem to be a universal approach to interaction skills. I'm sure it is thought through better in the Skills book, but not everyone has that.

 

Interaction resistance appears in a 5e supplement, so it's been around since at least then.

 

I tend to be of the KISS persuasion when dealing with additional rules. I don't mind there being lots of pages of explanations, but I want the base system to be simple. I don't want them to crit my brain with the "Wall of text". HOnestly I couldn't get past half of what you wrote in the OP. Most of was just too much additional messyness.

 

BTW EGO and Pre have always been the way that one resists Pre attacks. Ego is best, but high has always worked too. Ego for those of strong will, Pre probably because those who have high Pre tend to be more resistant to Pre based coercion.

 

I guess when I want extra detail I FIRST go to the official sources of extra rules (ie Advanced Player's guides, and books like Hero System Skills (AKA Ultimate Skill)). Usually those sources will sate my desire for House Rules or extra detail on existing rules.

[Ice9]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

This post seems relevant, specifically the section on persuasive argumentation (scroll down). It's for a different game system, but the different categories of arguments seem like a pretty good framework.

[Lucius]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

John Fires: Hero doesn't have a way to turn to troll into a toadstool.

Lucius Alexander: Sure it does. That's what Transform is for.

John Fires: Well, yes, you can use Transform, but it doesn't specifically say you can use it for that. There's no way to turn bison into building blocks either.

Lucius Alexander: ......

 

 

Would you say Mr. Fires is being silly? So would I. But Mr. Waters is being even sillier.

 

 

at least as far as the normal rule book goes, not every interaction skill has a 'resistance' to apply: for example conversation does not. Of course you can house rule one in, but it is not part of the rules.

 

I'm not sure which "normal rulebook" you're consulting, but my PDF copy of the 6th Edition Core Rules, Vol 1, P 114, in a side bar, lists: Tight-Lipped (resists Conversation)

 

If being in a side bar, as opposed to in the main block of text for Resistance, makes it a "house rule" then I would say you are stetching the meaning of the term "house rule" pretty far....maybe not Megascale Stretch but at least Noncombat Stretch with extra multiples.

 

For that matter, you indulge in some pretty fancy feats of stretching elsewhere in the thread as well.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

There's no way to turn a paladin into a palindromedary

[Lucius]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

I meant: A fight needs one OCV Roll, one Damage Roll and (perhaps) a Knockback Roll.

 

That would be a pretty short fight. I have not seen many combats settled with one blow.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary thinks Charm with special effect: flattery would be a complimentary social skill

[Lucius]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

That may be fine for resisting overt interrogation' date=' for example you have your arm twisted but refuse to give in. It does not sound like it would work at all for 'Columbo interrogation' - where you say something that seems innocuous but that in fact gives away more than you intended. [/quote']

 

Interrogation is by its nature overt. "Columbo interrogation" is Conversation + Deduction.

 

your interrogation could be all about making friends and lulling someone into a false sense of security then getting them to tell you things that seem unimportant individually but build a picture overall

 

That would be Conversation.

 

 

That said, however, you have a point that the basic Hero System rules provide many orders of magnitude more detail for combat than for almost anything else. I don't disapprove of what you're trying to do or even how you are doing it necessarily, but I do want to make a few more points.

 

First, I wonder if saying "Let's spice up the social interaction rules - the basic Hero rules for such things tend to be bland and anticlimactic" isn't focusing on just one aspect of a bigger issue, namely that - well, I just said it. Hero System rules provide many orders of magnitude more detail for combat for almost anything else - not just the PRE based Skills but all other Skills as well. A doctor trying to stop an epidemic, an engineer trying to repair a starship light years from any planet, are just two examples off the top of my head of situations that would seem anticlimactic if reduced to one or a few die rolls.

 

Second, I want to caution against the use of the phrase "social combat" which I think I've already seen used once. Social interaction is not combat and combat makes a very poor metaphor for most social interaction. Using the term in my opinion encourages exactly the wrong mindset for a role playing game. For one thing, ideally many if not most social interactions should have more than one "winner" or at least one party should not feel like they "lost." Even if a social interaction is about conflict, winning and losing will not be as obvious and objective as it is in physical combat. After a fight, you can look and see who is still standing up and who is dead or unconscious, but after a couple of rivals exchange pointed witticisms, a bystander's opinion on who came out looking better is probably mostly determined by how they already felt towards one, the other, or both. And if I Charm a woman into my bed, I don't want anyone, least of all her, to feel like she's a "loser" because of that; she's actually damn lucky and I hope I make her feel that way.

 

Third, a Player Character by definition is a character whose choices are made by the player. That's the whole POINT of a role playing game.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders about Supplementary Social Skills

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Interrogation is defined as obtaining information forcibly or through psychological manipulation. Certainly if you are casually holding a glowing poker near someone's genitals that is overt. However if it goes more like: "Look, we know that Ramirez and his men are going through that valley sometime, and he leaves scorched earth behind him - no witnesses. If we knew when he was coming we could be there to stop him. Say, doesn't your neice work in the valley?", that is a bit more subtle. You are not even asking teh question outright. You are just pointing out something that the target may well know anyway (or the bit about 'no witnesses' could be a lie). Columbo (OK - that was not a Columbo example) - uses psychological manipulation when interrogating subjects. He makes them think he knows more than he dos but he is SUBTLE about it. Very often the subjects do not know what he is after. That sounds like the book definition of Interrogation, just not the 'talk, don't scream' variety.

 

You could use other social skills (acting and conversation, perhaps) but I don't think that interrogation is inappropriate. You may disagree.

 

On the second point, I've seen attempts to make scoial interaction work like combat and, well, we agree: it does not.

 

My thesis here is simply this: the character and the player are NOT the same. I think that, a lot of the time, social interaction should NOT be a matter of making EGO rolls precicely because I do not think that in most situations (except, perhaps, torture or extreme threat) it is a matter of EGO. You should resist most social interaction with skills that give you information to make an informed decision: does the character beleive what they are being told? That is a very different thing from 'will they do what is being required of them'.

 

Example.

 

PCs are approached by a man in a pub who says he knows where there is some treasure and he will tell them if they agree to hand over one particular bit to him: a harmless cross that is a symbol of his holy order.

 

Will teh PCs agree? Well that is up to them BUT what they should have is some sort of skill that tells them if they believe that there is some treasure, that the man is just after a harmless keepsake and so on. They may NOT believe but still want to check it out, they may fall for it hook, line and sinker, but the waay the guy comes across is important.

 

Maybe he is being honest, and the PCs believe him, and are drawn to assist, or maybe he is being honest but comes across as shifty (is he hiding something, or is he just naturally unbelieveable?). The point is that an EGO roll is rarely a useful measure of whether a PC would resist social skill use, although it may be OK for NPCs who are relatively unimportant - in conjunction with other skills too.

 

That is where the role playing comes in: give the PCs information and see what they do with it. You need some sort of dice system because not every GM is a great actor. The CSSs suggested are designed to address that, and also to make the charcter more finely tuned: they enable you to more accurately reflect the way in which that character will consistently react to certain situations: what pushes their hot-buttons.

[dmjalund]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

I thought Columbo worked by making the perp think he knows LESS than he does!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

I thought Columbo worked by making the perp think he knows LESS than he does!

 

Yeah, crazy, huh? Who knows what he knows?

[Lucius]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

You should resist most social interaction with skills that give you information to make an informed decision: does the character beleive what they are being told? That is a very different thing from 'will they do what is being required of them'.

 

Good point. Bears thinking on.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary uses EGGO to resist committing to anything: "I'm waffling."

[Christopher]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

someone could be strong in all three but be a sucker for a pretty face' date=' and Complications are a bit of a blunt tool for deciding how that interacts with social skills.[/quote']

Then why is "Sucker for a pertty face" right here:

http://www.nextgenrpg.com/masterlists.htm

Perhaps it is not that you can't model it as Complciation, but that you have problems valueing it as Complication?

 

Interrogation is defined as obtaining information forcibly or through psychological manipulation.

Many see interrogation as use of Batman style Intimidation, that draws mostly from his Reputation.

 

However if it goes more like: "Look' date=' we know that Ramirez and his men are going through that valley sometime, and he leaves scorched earth behind him - no witnesses. If we knew when he was coming we could be there to stop him. Say, doesn't your neice work in the valley?", that is a bit more subtle.[/quote']

That's plain persuasion. The point of view you want to bring across: "Your neice could be next, you have to tell us." It's just a standart persuasion technique to not tell what you really want as center of the atempt.

 

You should resist most social interaction with skills that give you information to make an informed decision: does the character beleive what they are being told? That is a very different thing from 'will they do what is being required of them'.

We already established that you can do this with Raw by just aplying the constructs that are already there.

 

Example.

 

PCs are approached by a man in a pub who says he knows where there is some treasure and he will tell them if they agree to hand over one particular bit to him: a harmless cross that is a symbol of his holy order.

Plain Persuasion again. The point of view he wants to bring across: "Please get cross from castle. Payment will be there". Just apply the bonuses from Presence attacks here:

Genuine/Legitimate need (he looks like a priest), mood of the PC (remember, you can apply a Bonus to Interaction Roll or a penalty to the Ego Roll, or Vice Versa). This could even lead to false alarms and interesting potential.

 

Note that you can't say for certain what the players want. Some say "my pc is my pc, I decide what he does" and will not accept any interaction atempt made against them. Ohters might demand that their PC is fully affected by all Persuasion atempts.

[Christopher]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

And if I Charm a woman into my bed' date=' I don't want anyone, least of all her, to feel like she's a "loser" because of that; she's actually damn lucky and I hope I make her feel that way.[/quote']

If she is, why do you needed to charm her? Why didn't she charmed you? You can't even be certain if you perhaps took advantage of her in some way.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Complementary Social Skills

 

Then why is "Sucker for a pertty face" right here:

http://www.nextgenrpg.com/masterlists.htm

Perhaps it is not that you can't model it as Complciation, but that you have problems valueing it as Complication?

 

Well it isn't valued as a complication at the reference you give, so maybe. And it isn't an official list. Never mind that: you CAN build it as a complication, as i think i acknowledged, but complications, as already stated, are blunt tools. This gives a far finer degree of control in character creation.

 

 

Many see interrogation as use of Batman style Intimidation' date=' that draws mostly from his Reputation.[/quote']

 

Maybe, but the definition I gave was from RAW. Reputation can certainly be worth a modifier, but Batman is about more than rep: he uses it as one of may ways to bring psychological pressure to bear.

 

 

That's plain persuasion. The point of view you want to bring across: "Your neice could be next' date=' you have to tell us." It's just a standart persuasion technique to not tell what you [i']really[/i] want as center of the atempt.

 

You could certainly adjudicate it that way, but if you read the rules it could come under interrogation or even bribery. There is significant overlap.

 

 

We already established that you can do this with Raw by just aplying the constructs that are already there.

 

No we didn't: sure you could use some sort of perception/analyse roll as a complimentary skill to your interaction contests. What I am saying is that, in an ideal world, players will make their characters act within their personality framework and 'EGO' is an irrelevance in many social situations. Even if you do not subscribe to that, a lot of social interaction attempts are all about dissembling and obfuscation rather than the clash of wills. The rules do not reflect this well.

 

 

Plain Persuasion again. The point of view he wants to bring across: "Please get cross from castle. Payment will be there". Just apply the bonuses from Presence attacks here:

Genuine/Legitimate need (he looks like a priest), mood of the PC (remember, you can apply a Bonus to Interaction Roll or a penalty to the Ego Roll, or Vice Versa). This could even lead to false alarms and interesting potential.

 

Note that you can't say for certain what the players want. Some say "my pc is my pc, I decide what he does" and will not accept any interaction atempt made against them. Ohters might demand that their PC is fully affected by all Persuasion atempts.

 

I'd argue that the 'right' skill to use, if there is suck a thing, depends entirely on the approach that the priest type takes to try and (small p) persuade the group to do what he wants.