Social BS

[PhoneLobster]

It doesn't have to be reaction rolls. Any rules that say "If you fail at social combat, the other party does not do what you want them to."

And that is why you never implement such a stupid rule. Duh.

Even before you get to dumb stuff like this the second you do that you have people gaming the system by deliberately taking the fall with reverse psychology demands.

[Username17]

It doesn't have to be reaction rolls. Any rules that say "If you fail at social combat, the other party does not do what you want them to."

And that is why you never implement such a stupid rule. Duh.

Even before you get to dumb stuff like this the second you do that you have people gaming the system by deliberately taking the fall with reverse psychology demands.

Except it's like this even in games where there are no reverse psychology demands because there are no demands. In most versions of D&D, the diplomacy system doesn't make demands of any kind - it just makes people your friend. So if you institute a target's level based DC for diplomacy effects (as for example: Rich Burlew's diplomacy hack did), then higher level characters are necessarily unfriendly dicks.

So just... don't write that? Why would you? Why would you diplomance someone who already wants to do what you're rolling over? If Lois Lane wants to give Supes a BJ and he wants mentioned BJ there's no reason for her to make a roll.

How come every single thing you ever say about social systems is so stupid? On the possibly false assumption that you are capable of shame, I'm just going to present your exact proposal with simple substitutions that make it painfully obvious how utterly terrible it is, and let you walk it back yourself.

• If LiveWire wants to give Supes a BJ and he wants mentioned BJ there's no reason for her to make a roll.
• If BlackFire wants to give Supes a BJ and he wants mentioned BJ there's no reason for her to make a roll.

Fail.

-Username17

[PhoneLobster]

In most versions of D&D, the diplomacy system doesn't make demands of any kind - it just makes people your friend. ...then higher level characters are necessarily unfriendly dicks.

Except they can just decide to be friendly and even decide to make you THEIR friend and have a higher success rate at that.

The only way that is not the case is if no one can decide to diplomacy or not (your stupid reaction system for instance) and where a failed outcome must lead to hostility (your reaction system). Even then your whole superman has no friends thing is fucking retarded because WTF happened to HIS reaction roll/diplomacy action?

Even in a broad diplomacy system if the action is "make someone my friend" the default state is NOT automatically "enemy until success at diplomacy action", and you do not have to design such a stupid system for no fucking reason.

Any system that does work like that (aka your reaction system) is needlessly and fundamentally stupid.

Fail.

You do realize your examples fail to demonstrate your point because they include text that defines them as desirable outcomes even if you personally find them inappropriate for your superman porn fan fiction?

You were trying to write "X offers Superman BJ which he doesn't want because it's from X but he would like a BJ so there is no roll". You couldn't write that because it was too obviously stupid and in bad faith so you wrote something that failed to meet required technical specs and then just ran with it hoping no one would notice.

[Username17]

Except they can just decide to be friendly and even decide to make you THEIR friend and have a higher success rate at that.

I understand that trying to have a rational conversation with PL about social systems is an exercise in futility, but you're wrong here. In the D&D system we are talking about, my diplomacy sets your attitude. So they can choose to try to make me friendly. In the version where characters gain "social defense" for going up in levels, Superman can get other people to be friendly to him, but he's still going to be a dick.

You do realize your examples fail to demonstrate your point because they include text that defines them as desirable outcomes even if you personally find them inappropriate for your superman porn fan fiction?

If your social system is even trying to model whether people get "blowjobs" or not, then going entirely to magical teaparty for whether people can be seduced by their sexy enemies is pretty much completely admitting defeat. That is a perfect example of total failure. I don't even know what you'd want my example to demonstrate.

-Username17

[MGuy]

Well pl basically has my response. For your example to work he has too not want a bj from one of them. If you meant to suggest he doesn't want a bj in one of those situations you said the opposite. I'm guessing to have a Point at all you meant that he doesn't want the second bj(for whatever reason you will probably only now put forth).

[Username17]

Well pl basically has my response. For your example to work he has too not want a bj from one of them. If you meant to suggest he doesn't want a bj in one of those situations you said the opposite. I'm guessing to have a Point at all you meant that he doesn't want the second bj(for whatever reason you will probably only now put forth).

Every red blooded and/or Kryptonian male wants a blow job from Black Fire. It would be a very good blow job. That is not why you don't accept it, and that is why your proposal is so terrible.

If your system is supposed to extend to "blow jobs" and it chokes and goes to magical teaparty when someone attempts seduction, your system sucks.

-Username17

[MGuy]

Unless you are going to point out what is bad about people who want a bj from someone to accept it then you will not have a Point. All you said was that he should want a bj from her. I would disagree but even if i didn't the results seem acceptable and you haven't mentioned how they aren't.

[Username17]

Unless you are going to point out what is bad about people who want a bj from someone to accept it then you will not have a Point.

You're going on ignore now.

-Username17

[MGuy]

Yup. I'll take that as a concession. You're obviously stuck because the second you reveal what's bad about superman getting a bj you reveal how he could not want one. Of you do that your whole addition falls through

[Kaelik]

Yup. I'll take that as a concession. You're obviously stuck because the second you reveal what's bad about superman getting a bj you reveal how he could not want one. Of you do that your whole addition falls through

If you don't understand the concept of wanting a blowjob from a seductive woman who wants to have sex with you, but also wants to incapacitate you sometimes for nefarious purposes, and who has a better chance of doing so when close to you, I don't know how we can help you.

Think about Spiderman and Black Cat. Sometimes they go out, sometimes they work together, sometimes they are on different sides, and sometimes she uses seduction to steal from him.

Does Spiderman want a blowjob from Black Cat?

Is not a yes or no question, and that is precisely the point.

[Starmaker]

The social system you use for the game shouldn't be an edge case opt-in thing. The state of the world should be an invariant with regards to how often you use the social rules rather than MTP. For whatever society you create, the system should do what the Tomes do for the D&D setting. (One consequence of this principle is that there can be no exceptions along the PC/NPC divide in the basic rules. I for one think NPCs influencing PC opinions of them runs contrary to the whole idea of tabletop roleplaying, but PCs still occupy the same niche in the world as equally statted NPCs.)

Super Dickery.

But lets say superman has +20 punching, and +0 talking. Lois rolls up and says "Hey its blowjob time". He says "I get awesome blow jobs constantly, who cares" Representing it being a thing he doesn't even want. She rolls up and says "Oh but I have +0 punching and +20 talking" and makes some checks that are pretty much guaranteed to succeed. Suddenly he is thinking "man, her blowjobs are probably the best, I should get one".

And then when Supes offers to reciprocate, she tells him to GTFO. Replacing character level with skill level doesn't help, in either case opposed diplomancy rolls mean that a more powerful character is more likely to rebuff genuine offers of nice things for no reason. If the diplo system can't handle gifts and tribute without exploding, it doesn't fucking work.


No soup for Superman.

Superman needs nothing from someone to help them, but the player isn't superman. The player wants to roleplay someone who doesn't need rewards, and the player needs rewards to encourage them to emulate that, just like a punching player needs rewards for roleplaying punching, even when he himself is not a puncher.

The player doesn't need roleplaying rewards, nor they roleplay an artificial thought-experiment personality which must never ever receive any rewards or benefits or anything that can be construed as such as a result of their actions. The player roleplays an altruist, which is a simple concept that people do in fact often play: you just do "good" and don't care about whether the person you help today is kind of a douche or not. In fact, it's concept-defeating and borderline-insulting to such a player to assume it actually secretly does matter for them. (Character advancement and other such stuff isn't in the picture, we're talking social systems.) If my char is helping everyone regardless of their pre- or post-help opinion of him, I don't secretly want everyone to fall in love with him anyway; I as a player actually need some mundane douchebags in the world so my character's personality can stand out.

HOWEVER - Under maximized raw utility, every other character in the world must necessarily become kind of a douche to the altruist, because, from the public's points of view, every scarce resource they might spend on the altruist is better hoarded or spent on people whose opinion they might actually influence.


I'll trade you a paper airplane.

Can't superman either get taken advantage of and pay the neighboring kingdom or he can get better at the social game, and not have +0 anymore.

It isn't the issue of having enough plusses but the translation of the subject matter of the deal into numbers to which those plusses might apply. If the core principle is "relative value", the whole world somehow functions in such a way that more powerful people (who aren't necessarily better at negotiation) pay more for everything in absolute terms. Powerful people constantly being taken advantage of in every single negotiation (unless they brush on on How To Win Friends, in which case prices merely stay the same) doesn't depict any sane shared world.

People see rich people all the time and hike prices up.

Sure, but rich people don't have to like it. If the diplomacy system underlying your world makes it so that you always have to pay in kingdoms, then that's how the world works, for some reason. You can't say it's "unfair" and seek a better deal, because there are no qualitatively better deals: everyone thinks it's kingdoms or gtfo, unless you're a real charmer.

If diplomacy forces characters to do things via "but thou must!" unspecified constraints, superheroes would be skulking in the shadows with earplugs and magically induced dyslexia in order to avoid accidental social interaction with mundanes. If diplomacy works on a conceptually lower level by simply making you believe a particular course of action is in your best interests, colossal frog is colossal.

[MGuy]

Well you need to understand what i just said. If there is a reason he doesn't, don't care if it's not the bj but the consequences instead, then he doesn't want that bj, at least in all the ways that matter. If there's no conflict there is no problem. That's why i said frank had no point. He didn't introduce a reason why superman didn't want the bj. You presented reasons for him not to want it.

[Kaelik]

Well you need to understand what i just said. If there is a reason he doesn't, don't care if it's not the bj but the consequences instead, then he doesn't want that bj, at least in all the ways that matter. If there's no conflict there is no problem. That's why i said frank had no point. He didn't introduce a reason why superman didn't want the bj. You presented reasons for him not to want it.

Frank presented very good reasons, but your ignorance and laziness presented you from seeing them.

If I had just said Black Cat and Spiderman, to anyone with the know, or with an internet connection and the willingness to look it up on Wikipedia, I would have given all the reasons I did give. The same for Frank naming characters.

[MGuy]

No he presented nothing, and did so intentionally. I know who blackfire is and why he wouldn't want a bj from her, but his assertion was he wanted it. I even mentioned (hint hint) that i disagreed that supes would even want a bj from her. I was waiting on him to remove his head from his ass an own up to the fact that HE knew that superman didn't want the damn bj in the first place. You knew that he was implying that s superman didn't want the bj too. And that's my whole point. If a reason is given that he doesn't want, whether it be not wanting the bj or the consequences he believes exist for receiving out, then it becomes something here doesn't want and so you enter seduction mode for bf to convince him take the bj he doesn't want from her, while LL doesn't.

[Kaelik]

No he presented nothing, and did so intentionally. I know who blackfire is and why he wouldn't want a bj from her, but his assertion was he wanted it. I even mentioned (hint hint) that i disagreed that supes would even want a bj from her. I was waiting on him to remove his head from his ass an own up to the fact that HE knew that superman didn't want the damn bj in the first place. You knew that he was implying that s superman didn't want the bj too. And that's my whole point. If a reason is given that he doesn't want, whether it be not wanting the bj or the consequences he believes exist for receiving out, then it becomes something here doesn't want and so you enter seduction mode for bf to convince him take the bj he doesn't want from her, while LL doesn't.

/RIP sanity

[RadiantPhoenix]

For the benefit of people reading this who aren't familiar with the many, many old arguments that have been had here about social rules, here is my attempt to explain what "reaction rolls" are:

Reaction rolls are a system for determining someone's "initial state", generally for the purpose of determining whether you get to interact with them socially or martially. Typically, the outputs will occupy a continuum from something like, "is going to stab you in the face right now." to "friendly and wants to chat."

The exact mechanical implementation may vary, but the general idea is something like this:

1. It is determined that you are about to encounter a group of soldiers marching down the road
2. Dice are rolled, with modifiers
3. The output determines the soldiers' initial attitude towards you.

[MGuy]

Well pl basically has my response. For your example to work he has too not want a bj from one of them. If you meant to suggest he doesn't want a bj in one of those situations you said the opposite. I'm guessing to have a Point at all you meant that he doesn't want the second bj(for whatever reason you will probably only now put forth).

Every red blooded and/or Kryptonian male wants a blow job from Black Fire. It would be a very good blow job. That is not why you don't accept it, and that is why your proposal is so terrible.

If your system is supposed to extend to "blow jobs" and it chokes and goes to magical teaparty when someone attempts seduction, your system sucks.

-Username17

So this is what Frank said. He completely ignores when I give him an out. I tell him if there is a reason he doesn't want the BJ he hasn't given it. Then he goes on to insist he wants the BJ but there's "something else" that makes it not good. Which he then goes on not to mention because I don't know. Let's see what I say a little later where you quote me:

Yup. I'll take that as a concession. You're obviously stuck because the second you reveal what's bad about superman getting a bj you reveal how he could not want one. Of you do that your whole addition falls through

If you don't understand the concept of wanting a blowjob from a seductive woman who wants to have sex with you, but also wants to incapacitate you sometimes for nefarious purposes, and who has a better chance of doing so when close to you, I don't know how we can help you.

Think about Spiderman and Black Cat. Sometimes they go out, sometimes they work together, sometimes they are on different sides, and sometimes she uses seduction to steal from him.

Does Spiderman want a blowjob from Black Cat?

Is not a yes or no question, and that is precisely the point.

You even go on to give reasons why the spider isn't going to BC for his BJs. Then when I respond to you, you don't even deny that's the case:

Well you need to understand what i just said. If there is a reason he doesn't, don't care if it's not the bj but the consequences instead, then he doesn't want that bj, at least in all the ways that matter. If there's no conflict there is no problem. That's why i said frank had no point. He didn't introduce a reason why superman didn't want the bj. You presented reasons for him not to want it.

Frank presented very good reasons, but your ignorance and laziness presented you from seeing them.

If I had just said Black Cat and Spiderman, to anyone with the know, or with an internet connection and the willingness to look it up on Wikipedia, I would have given all the reasons I did give. The same for Frank naming characters.

Note how you didn't even counter my point. Your only concern was insisting that Frank was saying the same thing except he left important details like, I don't know, significant reasons why Supes DOESN'T want to get a BJ from Blackfire which is crucial. Because if superman has a reason for not wanting to get that BJ then it's something he isn't already wanting. If it isn't something he already wants to do then the seduction mini game comes in to convince him. Bam, not a problem. Remember, the original 'problem' was that Supes doesn't want to get a BJ from LL because when LL tries to convince him to get one he rejects her because she fails some arbitrary test to give him what he wants. My position is that there's no reason for LL to have to roll. Bringing up people who aren't LL and actually are fundamentally enemies to Supes is a moot point because they don't happen to have the quality of being someone Supes 'wants' to bang (even if the reason he doesn't want to bang the other are because of the likely consequences).

[Kaelik]

Black Cat is, in almost every single introduction, explicitly an enemy of Spiderman. And she sleeps with him anyway, and he sleeps with her anyway.

My entire fucking point is that your completely bullshit attempt to quantify whether Superman wants a BJ from blackfire is stupid and nonsense, because the answer is always yes, and also always no. So please please please stop designing your system around a determination that is mutually contradictory with itself.

[RadiantPhoenix]

For the funzies: the Batman reaction roll table:

1d6	Reaction
0	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
1	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
2	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
3	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
4	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
5	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
6	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"
7	"My parents are DEEAAAAAAD!!!"

[Grek]

You're missing the point by a mile, MGuy.

Let's look at the Spiderman example more closely. Spiderman wants to be paranoid when he's being seduced into a trap (so that he will avoid the trap) but trusting when he is being seduced for purely romantic reasons (so that he can enjoy himself). If you make it so that the social interaction rules only come out when Spiderman is being lured into a trap, he's going to default to being an uncompromising prick who is constantly paranoid during the social minigame (because he knows from all the seduction rolls that it's a trap) and declare by fiat he's going to be unusually trusting today when interacting outside of it (because he knows it can't be a trap due to the lack of seduction rolls). You have to be consistent here in other to maintain verisimilitude. Either have both Black Canary and Mary Jane roll seduction checks vs Spiderman's mechanically represented ability to judge intentions, or make the player decide who to trust in both cases.

[Orion]

What is the benefit to having your system model "reaction" or "attitude" at all?

[Sakuya Izayoi]

Blowjobs are not a very good currency for a cosmic-level super. But let's say Lex Luthor wants to set up a terminal disease-curing initiative in your name, with millions of dollars in annual funding. Just your name on the dotted line, and countless lives saved.

Now, Lex Luthor has a lot of political enemies. Factions in foreign countries who resent the presence of his branch businesses and their shady practices. Labor unions. Espionage agents who know too much. Alien empires. Maybe a deity or two.

As a 0th level peasant, I couldn't really destroy any of these guys outright in order to repay the favor. However, Superman COULD. Now, Superman doesn't get mind controlled into laying waste to his enemies just because Lex did this for him. But, just by making their association public, Lex Luthor sort of becomes Raven from Snow Crash. The POTENTIAL of Superman annihilation is something Lex can leverage into his hostile dealings.

Superman must be very careful who he takes paper airplanes from.

[RadiantPhoenix]

What is the benefit to having your system model "reaction" or "attitude" at all?

In a topical context: determining whether Superman wants to befriend you or arrest you.

It determines what superman's position is so that you can have this:

Does it matter if you can't get Superman to accept a BJ? I mean, if he doesn't already want one I really don't see a pressing need to fashion a system where lower level characters could make him want one. Him being unmovable from certain positions (IE killing people, doing bad deeds, etc) is a staple of the character. In fact, most 'good' heroes typically are as unmovable as powerful villains when it comes to convincing them to do something they don't already want to do. Usually powerful people are tricked into doing something they wouldn't normally because they think it will already help them advance whatever ideal they already got going. Only thing I'd say is that I'd probably make it tied to 'will' instead of a character's ability to break through walls though.

[MGuy]

Black Cat is, in almost every single introduction, explicitly an enemy of Spiderman. And she sleeps with him anyway, and he sleeps with her anyway.

My entire fucking point is that your completely bullshit attempt to quantify whether Superman wants a BJ from blackfire is stupid and nonsense, because the answer is always yes, and also always no. So please please please stop designing your system around a determination that is mutually contradictory with itself.

What fucking contradiction? I may not know every Black Cat comic or whatever but when she was first introduced she was like Cat Woman to batman and she hit on/tried to seduce Spiderman every chance she got. If she manages to pull it off and is SUCCESSFUL at seduction that doesn't contradict any god damned thing. Of course, as I said, I don't know every fucking comic that's ever come out for... well... anybody so there's a non-zero chance you can drum up some line where Spiderman acts incredibly out of character and does her with absolutely no provocation/prior relationship I don't know but I wouldn't want to design a system to try and encompass every random (and at times out of character) writing decision an author makes.

[MGuy]

You're missing the point by a mile, MGuy.

Let's look at the Spiderman example more closely. Spiderman wants to be paranoid when he's being seduced into a trap (so that he will avoid the trap) but trusting when he is being seduced for purely romantic reasons (so that he can enjoy himself). If you make it so that the social interaction rules only come out when Spiderman is being lured into a trap, he's going to default to being an uncompromising prick who is constantly paranoid during the social minigame (because he knows from all the seduction rolls that it's a trap) and declare by fiat he's going to be unusually trusting today when interacting outside of it (because he knows it can't be a trap due to the lack of seduction rolls). You have to be consistent here in other to maintain verisimilitude. Either have both Black Canary and Mary Jane roll seduction checks vs Spiderman's mechanically represented ability to judge intentions, or make the player decide who to trust in both cases.

I don't kow what you mean. The Seduction rolls are required in exactly this scenario: Spiderman do you want a BJ? Spiderman: [Y/N?] If Spiderman says Yes there is no roll. If he says No then there is one. As simple as that.