|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Has anyone tried presenting social encounters in a more visual (meta) sense, much like a chase scene? How did you do it, how did it work?
When I started playing PFS I was not familiar with the social rules (our home games were murderhobo or no-roll diplomacy), and unlike the combat on the grid diplomacy+intimidate rules are not as transparent and are more difficult to pick up on the fly. This has led to player frustration as I didn't really understand the mechanics of this social encounter I was fumbling through.
I'm thinking of making a social encounter laminated mat, with Hostile to Helpful set up in chase scene boxes with diplomacy and intimidate rules printed on the mat. As the diplomacy continues I can move the NPC minis on the mat and the players can see the difficulties on their checks change and the mechanical constraints between them and what they want.
The idea being; when the group patches up and wakes up a defeated combatant, they can see that the enemy is hostile/unfriendly to them and that they can use a difficult diplomacy check or a easy intimidate check to improve their attitude. After that check they can see the list of diplomacy requests and can assess the options available to them.
The other idea is also to help educate everyone at the table on how diplomacy works outside of plot mechanics and help make diplomacy run smoother when those players play at other tables or GM.
I acknowledge that this might cause less RP, but I'm willing to risk it.
Developer
|
It's an interesting idea that would work best in situations where the NPC's attitude in plainly obvious—otherwise it can devalue Sense Motive.
Although not PFS-legal, you might also enjoy checking out the Social Combat Cards, which present a more visual way of tracking and advancing encounters of social intrigue.
|
I make face cards for all of the NPCs in a social encounter, and hold them up when roleplaying them. This gives players a useful visual cue for their diplomacy. I also try and have different voices for each NPC, although that unfortunately often means simple accents or tonal differences since I'm not a man of a thousand voices.
For more involved social scenarios like weddings, I will leave the face cards all on the table and players can make notes on their interactions with them, or put their "successes" down. I have played it both where successes were discussed explicitly, and where it was more descriptive, and frankly, the descriptive method works better for RP.
Only you know your group, but I know that some of my players change their approach when minis are on the table. I'd make sure that the visual tools don't discourage diplomacy and roleplaying just by their usual association with combat.
|
I use face cards in a similar manner to GM Lamplighter, especially in the influence mechanic scenarios. I've never thought to put the mechanical information on them before. I guess I just always assumed the players weren't supposed to know how difficult it is to influence someone. I do try to give hints as to their level of success in roleplaying the responses.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg
|
I like that idea of having a sheet to put minis on. Of course, as John said, it's only good if the players have a reason to know about the NPCs' attitude. But it's still an option to place the minis on cards behind a screen and remove the screen if the players roll high enough Sense Motive.
In some social scenarios with multiple interactions going on simultaneously, had prepared cards with the NPCs' names on them and had players put their minis on the card corresponding to the NPC they wanted to talk to and then roleplayed each NPC as a seperate diplomacy encounter involving only the PCs that wanted to talk to that NPC. Makes handling the diplomacy phases much easier.
|
|
Now that it has come up twice, what is the sense motive DC to know an NPCs attitude? I assumed it is obvious unless the NPC's hostile reaction is to lie, deceive and fake friendship. Would this be an intentional deception that requires Bluff vs Sense Motive, or is it a DC 20 to get a hunch that you've made that sour crusader friendly instead of indifferent.
Edit: I see how the reference to chase scenes could be upsetting, that may have been a bad comparison... or a foreboding that trying to add more structure to the diplomacy mini-game is doooomed.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I would say DC 20 Hunch.
As you said, in many situations it will be obvious which end of the spectrum someone is on. But hunch will get you closer to accurate.
Is that person friendly? Or just helpful? Is that bureaucrat dragging this out because he is bored? Or because he doesn't like you?