Anti-Antisocial Aspirations


Advice


One thing I keep coming up against is the penchant for using Charisma as a dump stat... even when there is a mechanical reason for its use, the idea for putting ranks into social based skills (i.e. they are viewed as useless in combat) is ignored. Even social based spells such as Charm Person is ignored.

Does anyone have any recomendations to help get across their importance?

I have put them up against opponents who actively use these skills (bluff for feints etc...) to showcase thier uses in combat. They have even waxed poetically about role playing sessions over hack-n-slash... and when confronted with the option, yeah... they go for their swords first.

Just what am I doing wrong?

I have even flat out told them that the need is there for social skills, likewise they are familiar with these rules... but yet the parties of Antisocial Heroes continues, unabated.

Opinions?
Thoughts?
Suggestions?


Follow through with the natural consequences of failed Diplomacy (and the like) rolls.


Tried that...

Group of villagers were not happy with them over a bad diplomacy incident...
Response: "Perhaps next time when their town need saving, it can burn. Lets see how happy they will be then."

EDIT: Back up course of action turns into intimidation through their actions...


So whatever then. If they're fine with the consequences, then so should you be.

There's a lotta s*~& you can't get done without social skills in this game.


Are the player’s role playing their low CHA? If not then you should be enforcing their stats. If they are roleplaying their CHA what is the problem? Role playing is not problem solving. If the characters built antisocial murder hobo’s and are playing in character how is that any less role playing?

I have had players who dump CHA and play it up by being obnoxious to the point the rest of the party won’t even let them talk to NPC’s. It has led to some of the funniest and most memorable gaming sessions ever.

Usually there is at least one or two characters in a group with decent CHA and social skills. As long as the whole party is not a bunch of antisocial misfits they should be ok.

Do you reward the players for using social skill? Most GM’s don’t, or if they do they only give XP instead of other rewards. Many players look at it from a stand point of what did I get out of the encounter. Take two scenarios. In the first scenario you encounter a group of bandits and fight them. The second scenario you encounter the same group of bandits but talk your way out. In the first scenario the players get the XP for defeating the bandits and any treasure they may have. If they get nothing out of the second scenario, or only get some XP that reinforces the hack and slash mentality.

What you need to is to reward characters for having high social skills. I have used diplomacy as a bonus when purchasing. A high diplomacy gets the player a discount a low one means they pay extra. As a general rule if you want something used reward it in a way the players can understand and care about.


A lot of players see a fight as a reward. So setting things up so that the choices are "talk your way out of a fight" or "fight" is not going to really motivate them to polish up the social skills.

Maybe try to set it up so that they only get to the good fight if they succeed on their social skills? They know a bandit group is in the area but they can't find them unless they can talk the townfolk into helping out, something like that. If they fail then they wander around and everybody just kind of gives them the cold shoulder and all they get is a lame random encounter or two.

The problem is that you have to be willing to do the work to prep two totally different paths and be willing to let the players go down the less fun path. It's kind of like the problem with pumping the survival skill... if the DM wants you to follow the tracks you're going to succeed no matter what and if he doesn't you won't.


First... Yes, I have, and do give xp/perks for social encounters. I fully do believe said encounters should be rewarded.

As far as the actual roleplaying goes, all but one has a Cha of 8, they to a tee, play as the cold brooding type (good and neutral alike). One of my 8's does tend towards being the party Face (complete with donating to local orphanages).

Now my CN player with the 12 Cha, with some Diplomacy (4 ranks), is the greedy one of the party... and plays it.

One thing I should note, despite conversations to the contrary, this group is very much of the opinion of Cha = beauty... and not so much force of personality. So, if you ask them... the first thing they look at is their Cha and respond with... "well, I'm a bit homely looking. You're prettier, you talk to him..."


Pathos wrote:

Tried that...

Group of villagers were not happy with them over a bad diplomacy incident...
Response: "Perhaps next time when their town need saving, it can burn. Lets see how happy they will be then."

EDIT: Back up course of action turns into intimidation through their actions...

Well, whose to say they are the only adventurers in the area? Maybe the next time they come back to town there are other heroes there who ask them to leave?

EDIT: reread the OP and answered my own question...

Have you asked them about why they dump the stat and don't use the skills?


chuffster wrote:

A lot of players see a fight as a reward. So setting things up so that the choices are "talk your way out of a fight" or "fight" is not going to really motivate them to polish up the social skills.

Maybe try to set it up so that they only get to the good fight if they succeed on their social skills? They know a bandit group is in the area but they can't find them unless they can talk the townfolk into helping out, something like that. If they fail then they wander around and everybody just kind of gives them the cold shoulder and all they get is a lame random encounter or two.

The problem is that you have to be willing to do the work to prep two totally different paths and be willing to let the players go down the less fun path. It's kind of like the problem with pumping the survival skill... if the DM wants you to follow the tracks you're going to succeed no matter what and if he doesn't you won't.

The bolded part is exactly where the problem lies... the effort isn't there, on their parts. They have been expressly told that Diplomacy/social skills will be of use... but when those checks fail, it comes down to the intimidation tactics through their actions to get the results they want.

So, yes... they end up on the harder road... then get pissed at the town folk for not being more cooperative (despite the fact that they failed the checks that they needed).


Aaron Whitley wrote:


Have you asked them about why they dump the stat and don't use the skills?

Easily answered there... Main stat for their builds (main class stat > Con > Dex)... everything else is secondary, with Cha on the bottom...

Yeah... we have had that conversation on multiple occasions. :o/


Which is why I headed here... how can I work on breaking the cycle?
When 95% of the time the low charisma social misfits seem to be the rule of the day...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, first bit of advice for Advice. Sit down with your players and talk about it like reasonable people.

Next, don't tell your players how to play. Just don't. That's how you destroy groups.

You can't make players raise Charisma and use social skills unless there's a point to Charisma and social skills. They're apparently all playing brooding loners, so there's no point. Even if they weren't, "poor social skills" is just as valid a character trait as anything else. Nothing you do will change the fact that that's always an option for a character.

Intimidation can substitute for diplomacy (same rules and DCs and everything) they just get pissed off at you after helping you. If you're complaining that they're intimidating without using intimidate, stop letting them intidimate for free and make them roll (with appropriate modifiers). If they make threats and botch the intimidate roll, make them follow through on the threat or be ignored. If you're complaining that they're using intimidate instead of diplomacy, maybe that's their character's choice. If you really want you can give them an "I told you so" every time diplomacy would have been more helpful but don't be surprised if that doesn't change their behavior.

They appear to be happy about how things are working currently (or wildly ignorant of how diplomacy might have helped them). That makes the fly in the ointment you, and either you need to adapt or bow out. Or be a lot more clear about what they could have used diplomacy for. It's a common GM problem where omniscience about the plot means you know hundreds of things that players would never even think of attempting because they're not as creative, they don't know as much, or it just didn't occur to them. Since you mention resorting to the sword instead of words that seems to imply that they attacked rather than trying to talk their way out. Did they know they could? Did they even suspect? Because let me tell you, sword always works. Words... not so much.


'Sword always works' up until you meet that over-your-APL group who has more sword, unfortunately.

Still, Charisma ended up the traditional dump stat due to ... well, every other stat having a concrete in-game benefit. Haul and hit stuff, dodge stuff, not die, know stuff, sense stuff, and ... um ... yeah. It's also why I haven't been able to confidently create an idiot PC. I've toyed with the idea, but even in other games it just hoses you too much.

I'd say it's a challenge to do. (I'm also guessing you're light on bards and sorcerors in this group.) Still, remember that Intimidate *is* a Charisma skill (or a lost feat). If nothing else, start putting in things about just what kinds of 'heroes' these guys are. Subtle hints like other bards making fun of them in satires, other heroes gloating, a legion of Hellknights taking up shop because the town figures if they're going to deal with jerks they'll at least have contract-limited jerks ...


Intimidate... nope... not one trained in it... useless skill.
As far as social skills in party... as stated above, one has 4ranks. Beyond that, another has ranks in Sense Motive... that's it.

Also, as stated above, I have let them know that Diplomacy/social skills will be of use...
They have expressed an intrest in settling land in the Magnimar/Sandpoint region... which I have let them know that Diplomacy will be of need/use.

Despite this... they continue to view social skills as suboptimal.

It isn't a matter of teling them how to pkay their characters... its a matter of letting them know what they need to make their goals succeed. If they want long standing allies, as good and neutral characters, Diplomacy is the way to go... Intimidation works in the short term... but its the Diplo for theong haul


Pathos wrote:

Intimidate... nope... not one trained in it... useless skill.

As far as social skills in party... as stated above, one has 4ranks. Beyond that, another has ranks in Sense Motive... that's it.

Also, as stated above, I have let them know that Diplomacy/social skills will be of use...
They have expressed an intrest in settling land in the Magnimar/Sandpoint region... which I have let them know that Diplomacy will be of need/use.

Despite this... they continue to view social skills as suboptimal.

It isn't a matter of teling them how to pkay their characters... its a matter of letting them know what they need to make their goals succeed. If they want long standing allies, as good and neutral characters, Diplomacy is the way to go... Intimidation works in the short term... but its the Diplo for theong haul

Then .... well, let them reap the rewards.

Failed Intimidate rolls can be frustrating, and there's debate about why the raging barbarian has a worse time than an effete bard, but that's another time. And if you want to build a kingdom, even evil rulers will need Diplomacy.

You'll have to *enforce* the results of antisocial behaviour. Until then there's no point to them trying other tactics. Once the *consequences* of failed rolls start adding up, and hurting their characters, they may start investing in other things. And even Charisma 8 characters can rely on talking -- sure, you're not good at it but throw enough skill points at it and watch it go. (See how many Lone Wanderers and Couriers are Charisma 2 and can talk the fight out of anyone in their games.)

But until then, they'll have to see how hard they're making their own lives. And if they won't go out and make friends, then it's on them when the town votes in *favour* of the evil night goddess when she comes back.


Well.. thanks for the responses guys... I'm out for the night... Game tomorrow.

Peace


What point buy are you using? If you are using a low point buy this may be part of the problem. Many classes require decent scores in multiple stats. If you are on a low point buy it tends to encourage the use of dump stats.

Also are the players playing skill light classes? When you only have 2 skill ranks per level you may not have any points to spare. If that is the case then you could use a variant of the background skill rules out of Unchained. Give all characters 2 extra skill point per level, but they can only be used for social or background skills.

It also seems you are letting them get away with using skills they don’t have. You said they are intimidating NPC’s into cooperating with them, but no one has any points in intimidate. Next time they try intimidating someone have the person ignore them or even better ridicule them.

Is it only social skills they are ignoring, or is it all noncombat skills? If they don’t have the relevant skills they should be paying the price for it. For example if no one has appraise and diplomacy they should be getting ripped off by the local merchants. No sense motive then throw some sob story at the good players and rob them blind.


Qaianna wrote:


Still, Charisma ended up the traditional dump stat due to ... well, every other stat having a concrete in-game benefit. Haul and hit stuff, dodge stuff, not die, know stuff, sense stuff, and ... um ... yeah.

Basically this. The game doesn't reward you in concrete ways for having the skills. Combat is an entire chapter. Diplomacy is what... three paragraphs and a chart?

Look at Pathfinder Unchained for alternate skill systems if you need to, but start pushing them to realize that they need people skills if they want to succeed.

Start with having trouble finding information. Then if that doesn't work basic services start to cost more. If they complain that isn't how it is in the books, give them a check to try to normalize prices. Keep eliminating basic services that are available. No one wants to deal with a bully.

No one is going to try to hire them for a job. They might hear a whisper about an adventure, but if they try to get details... that's Charisma. People will clam up around them. Let them live in a bubble if they want to. It's pretty boring.

In the end if they are basically intent on playing "The Godfather" in terms of strong arming people, let them fall asleep in an inn, and then have the innkeeper burn it down himself. (Final measure.) In the end if you're powerless and something is threatening your entire town, you take extreme measures, especially if you're not confident in your chances to sneak up and slit their throat.

It won't kill them, but when the entire town is outside with torches, they might get the idea.


On the other hand, you could tell them no stat can be dumped at all.

Your group sounds like high optimization murder hobos. If all they want to do is kill things then run a mega dungeon and the like, don't include social situations. If you are running an AP and a social situation comes up, let them try their intimidation tactics but ask for an intimidate roll. Because it sounds like your letting your PCs get away with breaking the games rules, they are subverting the social skills entirely and you are letting them.

If a player says "I hit him in the face and ask him again". Tell the player to roll damage of an unarmed strike and then ask him to make an intimidate roll. Tell him he can add half the damage to his check. A failed check means the man calls
For the town guards and the PC in question gets thrown in Jail for a night. Repeated offences means a longer stay. Maybe even make say a 3rd offence be punishable by death, the player can make a diplomacy check to avoid the death penalty but pretty sure they will fail. make sure you give them warning of this though, like after the second offence have the guard say "1 more and your *makes a hanged by roped motion*", but this means you need to follow through on the third offence.

The only reason I suggest the death of a PC is because sometimes pulling the trigger is the greatest teacher out there. "Sorry but your actions have consequences" this will give your players a swift kick in the butt and might send the message that hey maybe we should take social skills. Only use it as a last resort type thing though.


ABCoLD wrote:
It won't kill them, but when the entire town is outside with torches, they might get the idea.

Or slaughter a bunch of level 1-5 commoners and take all the stuff that was previously unavailable. If they do it right there won't be any witnesses or other people alive enough to finger them as the suspects. Good characters shouldn't, neutral characters are in the clear though (since the villagers came to them with hostility first). Sort of changes the tone of the game though.

In case that wasn't clear, this is a terrible idea. You don't roll diplomacy to buy stuff. You might roll diplomacy to get a discount, or buy something illegal or dangerous, or get something made special. You don't roll it just to buy something. That's what coin is for (and it speaks much louder than personal charisma). If someone is willing to give you money for your goods, why would you ever refuse?


Historically most societies barter for services and good. The idea of a set price items is a modern concept. The reason someone would refuse to sell to you is because they don’t like you. Just look in the news about people not wanting to do business with someone because of something they said. If you want a clear cut example look how many companies have decided not to do business with Donald Trump because of his remarks. The city of New York is looking to end all business with him.

If half of what the original poster said is true this group should have developed a very bad reputation. Having cities or towns not wanting anything to do with them is not unreasonable. From what was said the group has a mixture of good and neutral characters. Giving the group a reputation for evil would not be out of line.

Are any of the players divine spell casters for good deities? If so have their deities get involved. Most good deities will take a very dim view of their actions. Even many neutral deities will frown on this sort of thing. How a worshiper of a deity acts affects people’s view of the deity. If none of the players are divine casters then they are probably paying for healing. This could be another way to encourage them to be more polite. If they can’t get the healing they need because of their reputation or it costs more they may change their ways.


If there has to be direct, combat-time uses then let there be such. Give hero points for interacting with the world like they're real people, and let the players know it'll be happening.

Or, roll with it and make social interactions purely roleplayed and not dependent on stats or rolls at all.

Though, players with a real aversion to this stuff usually have reasons. Maybe you or maybe a previous GM have made every social contact hazardous, every word spoken interpreted in the worst possible way. That's the sort of thing that makes players produce backgrounds with their family and friends pre-killed off, and characters with no desire to talk.


Again.. thanks for the input guys... most welcome, and appreciated...

On the upside... I was blown away this weekend when one of my players had actually point skill points into a social skill (Intimidate)... And used it!

I have to say, it was quite refreshing to see. I hope to see more in the future. But we'll see.

One thing that made it rather funny is when someone else at the table commented that: "Why? You aren't going to use it".

Good times were had by all, it seemed... even the joking when some of his rolls weren't all that spectacular.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Anti-Antisocial Aspirations All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.