My players are about to take on a module that will incorporate a goodly amount of diplomatic "combat" with other parties. I'm trying to find a good system that would work for this. I checked out Dynasties and Demagogues, and the complex debate system is way, WAY too complex. I think it would slow down gameplay if everyone's constantly cross-referencing tables. And the other two sets seem a bit too simple for my taste.
Are there other systems out there? I'm thinking of kit-bashing something out of a streamlined Dynasties & Demagogues system, skill checks, and my own thoughts. I'm also toying with using the complex debate system, but ripping out the cross-referencing chart. But is there something else out there?
I've wrestled with this too, and made the same calculation you did.
So yes, there's social combat in Necropunk, there's the duel of wits system in Burning Wheel, and the revised Diplomacy check at Giant in the Playground.
Paizo's also coming out with a social combat deck, like the chase deck, but I think it's next year.
That'll be nice. But I'd like social combat rules before I get the social combat deck. After all,
I designed a social combat system back in 3.5. The source is still up in the Internet, so if you would like to use it as a springboard for your own design, please feel free to.
Social Combat for D&D 3.5
It was never playtested.
Song of Ice and Fire RP is built around it, but trying to import that core mechanic is clunky at best
What exactly is "social combat"?
Are we talking about a bard magically/musically enhancing his diplomacy to control the minds of an enemy during an actual combat?
Or are we talking about a fighter haggling for a better price when he's buying a sword from a blacksmith?
Is it Perry Mason in a courtroom convincing a jury to convict a criminal based on the evidence at hand?
Is it Barack Obama trying to convince the Senate and the House of Representatives that Obamacare will save the U.S.?
Or is it:
"Rabbit Season!"
"Duck Season!"
"Rabbit Season!"
"Duck Season!"
"Rabbit Season!"
"Duck Season!"
"Duck Season!"
"Fire!"
And how often do any of these come up in your game, with the exception of the first two that already have perfectly good mechanics for resolving them?
Perry Mason and Barack Obama. And these will come up with moderate frequency in the next phase of the game.
Ahh, well, for me, I've always been more than happy with just roleplaying that stuff out. Strikes me as much more fun to have a half-hour RP session in the courtroom or in congress, than to simply say "My guy talks them into doing what I want. I roll a 17. Does it work?" - even if you get a more complex mechanic than that, still, for me the RP is the key.
If my players RP it well enough, then I move the story forward with the plot. I can't even remember a time in the last 3 decades where the outcome of a RP situation like Perry Mason or Barack Obama was resolved with dice in any game I played or GMed.
Not that I'm saying you're wrong - quite the contrary; I find the idea of social combat to be fascinating despite being challenged to think of (and failing the challenge) any situations in my experience where something like that would come up AND the plot of the story would not be unnecessarily derailed by failed rolls.
One simpler example of which I can think is in the second module of the Carrion Crown adventure path.
So in that example, what's wrong with letting the party "face" roll diplomacy during the trial at the critical moments (and roleplaying their parts between rolls). Is that not how Carrion Crown set it up?
So what advantage would be gained by creating a social combat to resolve it differently?
(not criticizing, still just trying to figure out what this would bring to my game and whether I would find a use for it myself).
DM_Blake wrote: Ahh, well, for me, I've always been more than happy with just roleplaying that stuff out. Strikes me as much more fun to have a half-hour RP session in the courtroom or in congress, than to simply say "My guy talks them into doing what I want. I roll a 17. Does it work?" - even if you get a more complex mechanic than that, still, for me the RP is the key.
If my players RP it well enough, then I move the story forward with the plot. I can't even remember a time in the last 3 decades where the outcome of a RP situation like Perry Mason or Barack Obama was resolved with dice in any game I played or GMed.
Not that I'm saying you're wrong - quite the contrary; I find the idea of social combat to be fascinating despite being challenged to think of (and failing the challenge) any situations in my experience where something like that would come up AND the plot of the story would not be unnecessarily derailed by failed rolls.
I have a couple goals. The first is that my players are a mix of roll-players and role players, and I'd like to introduce a system that keeps all of them happy and gives them all something to do and make them feel involved. The role-players are very, very proficient at their speeches and such, while my roll-players seem to enjoy the crunch (rules stuff and roles) a bit more.
My other goal is to ratchet up the tension and the stakes in my kingdom-building game. I find that building an encounter around multiple, opposed die roles actually draws players in a little more.
FATE has an amazing system for this. Or maybe it was the DM. The best example, alas, involved sci-fi. We poked our noses into someone's business and they started a PR campaign against us, trying to get us arrested, for half-way reasonable reasons. We did everything from interviews to outright hacking to fight back. Note that some PCs (such as my scientist and the hacker) didn't have much in the way of social skills but were still able to contribute. Halfway through the bad guys gave up attacking our rep and switched goals. I don't recall exactly what that new goal was, but it fit seamlessly into the system.
The system was very similar to FATE combat. There were skill rolls as attack rolls, other skills (eg Resolve, Presence) as "defenses" and we had a combined "social pool" that acted much like hit points (Resolve and Presense combined).
It was kind of like a freeform d20 Modern or 4e skill challenge.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
