Social System Critique

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
shinimasu
Master
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 7:04 am

Social System Critique

Post by shinimasu »

Alright so I'm trying to do a thing and I need to know if it's shit or not.

A PC and an NPC have reached an impasse. The PC has decided they would like to try and negotiate with the NPC and wishes to roll a persuasion attempt.

The PC only has 1 diplomacy skill but can choose from 5 different approaches:

Friendly
Assertive/Authoritative
Hostile
Deceitful
Bargaining

Each NPC has two styles that they are receptive to, one they are neutral to, and two they are not receptive to. If the PC picks an approach that the NPC is receptive to, they get a bonus to their skill roll, neutral no bonus, disdainful gets a penalty.

So for example the PCs are trying to negotiate with a villain's lackey. His receptive approaches are Bargaining (he's selfish and self serving) and Hostility (he's a coward and easily bullied into line), Neutral towards Friendly advances, and disdainful of attempts to Deceive him (he is suspicious by nature) or be Authoritative (command or try and argue with him).

My thoughts: In real life conversations, how people receive my statements often has less to do with what I've said and more to do with how I've said it. In most rpgs "how it's said" tends to be bundled into the diplomacy/charisma stat where it's assumed if you roll high enough your character said it the right way. I wanted something that allowed the GM to account a little more for tone without playing mother may I.

Investment in Talking Pretty can outweigh penalty: If a face with insane talking skills meets a TN despite picking a disdainful approach then the assumption is they're good enough to push through their social faux paw and get their intention across regardless.

Add ons:

- Character options for face focused characters that would give them either a bonus to two approaches of choice (at least enough to negate the penalty incurred for choosing poorly) or the ability to know which approaches are a bad idea.

- Modifiers for NPCs who are currently actively hostile to the party. The BBEG would probably all of his approaches set to "No" while someone who disliked the PCs intensely might have 3-4 disdainful approaches and only neutral options.

- Modifiers for NPCs who like the PCs a great deal. Basically reverse the above.


Does this seem like a workable social conflict resolution system or am I being too complicate/not complicated enough? Too much overhead for the GM? Just plain stupid?
Last edited by shinimasu on Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3441
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

Have you considered allowing something like 'Sense Motive' to determine which methods of influence an NPC is susceptible to?

What happens on a 'good roll'? How about a 'bad roll'?
-This space intentionally left blank
shinimasu
Master
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 7:04 am

Post by shinimasu »

Yeah I was thinking something like sense motive would tell you either one of their positive approaches or one of their negative approaches with the former having a slightly higher threshold to discover.

For results I'm currently leaning towards a hit counting system. So something like this.

Player misses TN by threshold of 2 or lower: Negotiation is unsuccessful, NPC may become more hostile to the player if an unfavorable approach was used.

Player misses TN by threshold of 1: NPC either refuses or offers an unfavorable compromise. Negotiation may be retried but if an unfavorable approach was used the NPC may become more hostile.

Player meets target number: NPC will agree or offer a favorable compromise depending on how complicated the PCs request is. If a favorable approach was used NPC may become more friendly.

Player exceeds target number by 1-2: NPC will agree wholeheartedly and will agree to risk themselves on behalf of the PCs

More hits: NPC becomes friendly regardless of what kind of approach was used.
Post Reply