[D&D 3.5] Lack of Social Mechanics (long)

[Andrew Cooper]

Greetings,

My D&D 3.5 group played again this weekend with mixed results.  Some things went well.  Some things not as well.  That's rather vague so I'll try to get to specifics quickly.  However, let me first catch everyone up on the dynamics of the group (since they have changed) and then get to what actually happened in the game session.

The Group:

I now have 5 players rather than 3.  Here's the makeup of the group and their characters:

Trey    - 30 years old and been playing D&D since grade school.
         Crysalyn Female Drow Swashbuckler
         Arin Male Wemic Templar
Fred    - 24 years old.  Been playing for 6 months to a year.
         Dondarrion Male Drow Wizard
         Camden Male Tiefling Rogue
Seth    - 20 years old.  Been playing for 6 months to a year.
         Githyar Male Githzerai Monk
         Lorrik Male Aasimaar Druid
--------- New Players ---------
Sean    - 10 years old. Son of Trey.  First D&D session as a player.
         Male Human Fighter (forgot name)
Caitlin - 9 years old. Daughter of Trey. First D&D session as a player.
         Arilyn Female Human Ranger
         
I think it is easy to see how the group dynamic changed this session.  We've been letting the kids sit in on the sessions and I've been letting them roll for and play the monsters for a month or two now.  I talked with Trey since last session and we discussed letting them join in as players.  They both seemed to be getting a decent grasp of what to roll and when so we figured a couple of the simpler (in terms of mechanics) character types would be appropriate.  Sean was easy to make a character for.  As a 10 year old boy, he just wanted something that could kick some ass and a big, brawny fighter with a 2-handed sword fit the bill nicely.  Caitlin was a little more problematic.  We talked to her about either a Paladin or a Ranger, both of which are sturdy characters with a few nifty abilities but not too many that it overwhelmed her with options.  She chose the Ranger because it got a cool pet (an eagle).

At the end of last session, the party had rescued the daughter of a wealthy merchant, Daelyn LaRoche, from some trolls that had attacked her and her bodyguards.  The party had gotten to within sight of the walls of Silverymoon and we ended the session.  While I continued to use the scene framing techniques I have discussed in other threads for this campaign, I wasn't quite as agressive with the scenes this time around.  That might have contributed some to my dissatisfaction with parts of the session.

Also between the last session and this one, I told the group that they would be in Silverymoon for a little while and asked them to give me some goals for their characters. I also explained what a Kicker was (I know it's a Nar technique... sue me.) and offered 1000 XP to characters whose players gave me one for them to use while they were staying in Silverymoon.  Here's what I got:

Crysalyn and Dondarrion (joined up for 1 Kicker):  They both wake up to find themselves not in the same place where they went to sleep.  The door to the strange room opens and a man enters.  "Ah... you're awake.  Excellent.  I've got a little something I want you to do."

Githyar:  The party is sitting at the Prancing Pony Inn (hey... I let them name it.  Blame them) when a large man strides in followed by some obvious lackeys.  "Hey, you!"  He yells at Githyar.  "I beat you fair and square in the arena!  You owe me some money and I ain't leaving until I get it."

Character Goals:
Crysalyn   - Wants to meet and train with Drizzt Do'Urden (Trey's a fan-boy).
Arin       - None as of yet.
Dondarrion - Wants to join a Wizard Guild.
Camden     - None as of yet.
Githyar    - Wants to start a traveling troupe of strange and exotic performers.  (He's off to a good start with his current traveling companions.)
Lorrick    - Wants to join a Druid circle.

The Session:

Scene 1 - The party approached the gates of Silverymoon and were stopped from entering (obviously).  Their races weren't exactly welcome in the city but because Daelyn was there they weren't immediately run off.  Daelyn went into the city to speak to her father and soon returned with Finneran Whitlocke, a Knight Leiutenant of the Knights of Silver, in tow.  It seemed that Daelyn's father, Gariel, was sufficiently grateful that he pulled some strings to get the party permission to stay in the city at his mansion.  Finneran was there to make sure that no trouble occurred on the journey through the streets to merchant's house.

This was a relatively short scene that added some color to the setting.  I got to describe the city in some detail and its layout and mood.  Still, I wasn't terribly happy with it.  I wasn't realy unhappy either.  It just seemed to have no challenge or interesting decisions that had to be made.  This is probably my fault but I just couldn't seem to come up with anything off the top of my head.  Nobody else complained or anything but it was obvious to me that the scene wasn't terribly engaging.

Scene 2 - Gariel LaRoche threw a dinner party for the characters and Lady Alustriel was invited and came to talk to such an interesting group of heroes.  The characters gave her the magical stones they had been hired to deliver to her.  Alustriel said she'd study the stones and thanked them.

After the dinner, Gariel met the party in his study and introduced them to two of his distant cousins (the new characters) and offered them a reward for saving his daughter's life.  He showed them two tables.  One table had 6 minor (but interesting) magical items on it while the other  had 3 more powerful items.  He said the party could either choose 3 of the minor ones or 1 of the more powerful ones.  After much debating and discussion (about 30 minutes of it), they decided on the 3 minor ones and divvied up the loot.

This went well, I think.  The decision was a difficult one because I made the powerful items cool enough to be really attractive but not so powerful as to instantly outweigh 3 of the minor ones.  The discussion was pretty lively and animated so I was happy with this.  It also got the two kid's characters involved in the story, so that they weren't sitting around bored.

Scene 3 - The group went to a money changer to deal with some financial issues and on the way back was taking a shortcut through some smaller streets when they heard muffled but hysterical cries from an alleyway.  A woman was being beset by a couple of ruffians!  Heroes to the rescue!  They made short work of the ruffians but the hysterical woman blasted Crysalyn with some sort of magic in her panic and a large half-orc leaped into the party from the roof-tops.  Massive melee ensued with Crysalyn going down hard to an axe-blow from the half-orc and the new fighter taking 40 points of damage before Arylin's eagle finally dropped the big barbarian.  Then the woman shapeshifted into Finneran, created a dimensional portal and escaped.

I instituted a new rule that everyone only have 1 character involved with any scenes from here on out, since we now had 5 players.  All the non-involved characters would get half XP so that they wouldn't fall too far behind.  This meant that there were no cleric types with the party for this encounter, which hurt them when the half-orc jumped in and started doing 20+ points of damage per hit.  The introduction of the mysterious shapeshifting foe went well too.  However, the best part of the scene was the kids getting involved in their first combat as players and watching them have fun as their characters proved to be effective and contribute to the party's success.

Scene 4 - The party tracked down Finneran and confronted him.  He managed to prove his innocence by having a valid alibi and he was upset enough to provide some healing to the party for their wounds.

Sean did something here that concerned me a little.  He basically said his character (the fighter) was going and resting and wasn't coming out until all his damage was healed.  It was okay this time but it's not always going to be an option.  I guess he'll learn.  It's part of playing with younger kids.

Scene 5 - Githyar's Kicker.  The big, burly man's name was Brogan and he had a Sorcerer, a Priest and a Fighter henchmen in tow.  It seems that Githyar had found a secret "Fight Club" of sorts in the city and had been participating.  Unfortunately, Brogan had beaten him but Githyar had refused to pay up his money because he suspected Brogan of using magic (which was forbidden) in the contest.  Brogan had finally tracked Githyar down and was demanding his money... a measely 50 gold.

A large bar brawl ensued.  It became apparent that none of the enemy were actually attempting to use lethal force as all their damage was subdual, so the party replied in kind... except for Sean, who was determined to use his sword and kill the enemy.  The Sorcerer used a grease spell to disarm him anyway.  Brogan got his money from the unconscious Githyar.  Marrik (the fighter with Brogan) ended up having a drink with Crysalyn (and later a romantic tryst).  The kids had fun, with Sean's fighter downing both the Sorcerer and the Priest with his fists before being taken down by Brogan.  Arylin was tossing chairs into the fight and having some fun.

This was one of the better scenes.  It might have just been the standard bar brawl but it introduced rivals for the party.  Seth really has it out for Brogan now as does Sean.  Trey's Swashbuckler had fought a duel with Marrik and disarmed him... then they had a drink and a little late-night rendezvous.  Rivals! Woot!  And ones that aren't instantly lethal but just engaged in one-upmanship.  I think this scene will lead to some cool stuff down the road.

Scene 6 - Dondarrion went to the University of Silverymoon, a college for Wizards, and joined.  He got the tour and some interesting information about the place.  The fees for entering were pretty steep but he had the money.  However, the fees were only for a year.  Next year... more fees.

I really screwed the pooch on this scene.  There wasn't any challenge to it, my descriptions were lack-luster and I suffered from a real case of "GM can't think of a way to make this interesting"-itis.  I feel kinda bad about it actually.  After all, a bunch of Wizards ought to be easy to make something interesting happen.  As it is, I blew it.

Session Synopis: Overall, things went fairly well.  Adding the two kids as players was pretty smooth.  They aren't all that involved with anything out of combat yet but I think that has something to do with being in the middle of a bunch of adults.  A bit of normal kid shyness is coming out.  In the combat part of things where the game part of role-playing is emphasized, they did fine.  They seemed more willing to participate when the rules defined HOW you participated.

This session brought to the fore that D&D doesn't have any real support in the system for dealing with role-playing outside of the combat system.  It doesn't deal with social or political conflicts much at all and it leaves everything to the GM and players to sort of "role-play' out.  This is really hindering me.  I'm the type of GM that needs some structure with which to exercise creativity.  I do well with the combat because it is tightly defined and thus gives me components to work with and manipulate.  D&D doesn't have anything like this for the social and political conflicts in the game.

Burning Questions:

What advice do you have for integrating kids into your games?  I've never had to do it before and I want to avoid as many pitfalls as I can.  The first session went pretty well but I want to keep them engaged while also keeping things interesting for my adult players.

How can I make the social and political arenas come more to life in my game?  I need some structure here and I'm somewhat at a loss.  I think if I gave the players some way to interact with the social situation in terms of mechanics that they could manipulate and use tactically, they would do so and enjoy it.  If anyone has done this type of thing as an add-on to D&D or another system that lacks it as an out of the box component, I'd love to hear about it.

[Mike Holmes]

What advice do you have for integrating kids into your games?

Have you considered something easier than D&D. Given that you want some support for social conflicts, perhaps you could kill two birds by moving to something else?

Mike

[Andrew Cooper]

Mike,

Yes, I have considered it.  I like TSoY, FATE, and Universalis as possible replacement systems.  My issue at the moment is really simple.  The group likes D&D and they want to play D&D.  To be clear, I don't dislike D&D.  It does quite a bit that that I do like.  Of course, there are the gaps the system that I don't like either.

At some point, I think the players will be willing to change systems and give something else a try but at the moment they are invested in these characters and in this system.  They've been talking about cool things they want to do when they reach higher levels and all sorts of things outside the actual sessions that really make me wary about trying to change just now.  Our next campaign, I intend to run in another system but right now I think I'd meet a good bit of resistance.

[Shreyas Sampat]

If anyone has done this type of thing as an add-on to D&D or another system that lacks it as an out of the box component, I'd love to hear about it.

On RPGnet, someone's been talking about doing a similar thing with Exalted's combat system, analogising it so it covers three different modes of social interaction. The modes cover emptional impact via force of personality, logical argumentation, and influence of social maneuvering.

hplovescats has the advantage that Exalted's recent supplements have done something very similar for him and he's stripping down those systems, but the effort remains useful to discuss, I think.

So, I'll try and sketch out a similar thing using D&D's combat mechanics layered over its skill system.

For emotional impact, the skills we may find relevant are:
Bluff
Intimidate
Perform
Sense Motive

These will parallel attack bonuses and AC.

Sense Motive is the emotional-conflict AC bonus.

Wisdom is the basic Initiative bonus. You might want to allow combat-initiative feats to add to this as well, I dunno.

Attack rolls are Bluff, Intimidate, or Perform checks, which are described as melodramatic force-of-personality assaults on the victim. When an attack 'hits', it has shaken the victim in some way. You should decide, before any attacks take place, what condition the attacker wants to inspire.

The goal of emotional impact is to inflict a specific state of mind on the victim. Rather than using an HP-analogue, we can crib some other clever D&D constructions and use Damage Saves. Let's use Will saves for these, though you might consider Concentration checks (maybe this can be a feat, making those characters who are predisposed to feats of mentalism distinctively unflappable).

The DC of the damage save is set by (math here; I think the usual equation is DC=(Attack roll-AC)+15).

If the damage save fails by less than 5, the victim's confidence wavers and he receives a -1 to future damage saves (These are cumulative). If the save fails by 5 or more, then the victim is Stunned for one turn by the force of the attack. If it fails by 10 or more, he caves under the other character's force, and that character gets to inspire an emotional state (fear, loathing, fascination, worship, whatever...insert mechanics here). In general, failing a save to this degree makes the victim putty in the attacker's hands.

You probably want to make emotional attack rolls a little less frequent than violent attacks, since their effects are so much more useful, and skills escalate much more rapidly than attacks do. Maybe once a minute is a good rate. If you think of some way to incorporate tactical movement, then you can also use iterative attacks in here with full attack actions, but you may want to increase the iteration increment, unless you want characters to be like Martin Luther King at like level 10. Bardic song can probably be made into an extension of this system that simply increases their ability to inspire specific emotions.

The skill sets that the parallel systems might use:

Logical argumentation:
Knowledges, Bluff, Professions, Crafts (Attacks; Bluff suffers a non-proficiency penalty, K, C and P are only relevant in their fields.)
Knowledges, Professions, Crafts (AC; use skill relevant to discussion)
Int (Initiative)
Damage Save using Int instead of Wis
Effects: Inflict a persistent belief on the target.

Social maneuvering:
Diplomacy, Intimidate, Gather Information (Attacks)
Diplomacy (AC)
Cha (Initiative)
Damage Save uses Cha
Effects: Inflict a persistent belief regarding the target on the community.
This lobe of the system probably wants some more skill diversity built in.

How's that look?

[Mike Holmes]

Is there any way to cut short the current game? That is, is there some story arc that you can just move rapidly towards completion?

If they're really looking forward to playing the characters at high level, then you may be doomed here. Is this just the grown-ups, or are the kids saying this stuff, too? If it's just the long-term players, perhaps you could run two games? One for them and one for the kids by themselves? The adults might turn out to prefer it that way anyhow, who knows?


This all said, I actually started playing RPGs at their age, moving quickly to D&D. So maybe it's not a big deal.

Consider also, however, that the age groups might also fatally flaw this endeavor. So your kids engage with these people socially outside of RPGs - do they go to movies with them, parties, hang out? If not, then why should it be OK for them to play RPGs together?

Mike

[Callan S.]

This session brought to the fore that D&D doesn't have any real support in the system for dealing with role-playing outside of the combat system. It doesn't deal with social or political conflicts much at all and it leaves everything to the GM and players to sort of "role-play' out. This is really hindering me. I'm the type of GM that needs some structure with which to exercise creativity. I do well with the combat because it is tightly defined and thus gives me components to work with and manipulate. D&D doesn't have anything like this for the social and political conflicts in the game.

I think the RPG market suffers from a customer perception the video game market doesn't. For example, if people pick up a first person shooter, they don't judge it by how well it handles political intrigue.

While in the roleplay market, people grab a game for some secondary reason (like it's popular/everyone knows how to play), with the implicit assumption that their primary goal in using the game will be supported. "Because roleplay is as limited as your imagination" or similar reasons.

Of course, creative focus comes from blocking out certain options or just not supporting them.

But I think it's fiscally dangerous in the current RPG culture to say your game focuses creativity in a particular direction only (and is all the stronger for it). People currently don't want to think of an RPG as limited, even as they crave limits in play.

[John Burdick]

Andrew,

The standard D&D answer would be build an engaging situation with whatever pregame tools it takes. To what extent would techniques and examples for GM prep help?

A large part of why Dogs in the Vineyard does social conflict well is the strong town building text. Simply deciding which conflicts to play is important with any game. Sorcerer also depends heavily on a specific approach to prep.

Most of your flat social interactions seem to be softness in basic situation-building more than a wonderful opening failing because of a bad system. I know that my own weakness in this area can't be made up by rules unless the rules cover creating the conflicts, as Dogs does.

John

[Andrew Cooper]

Shreyas,

Thanks!  That's something like what I was looking for.  It'll need some tweaking, I'm sure but it's a start.  I've also pulled out my old Birthright setting books and am looking at the framework it has for large scale conflict resolution (more political and social than military).

Mike,

I'm not really wanting to scrap the game as everyone (including me) is having fun and it really isn't broken.  It's just weak in some spots and I'd really rather just drift the rules some to address those weaknesses.  However, in June my group is getting together on a weekend for what we affectionately call "Geekfest".  We've got a cabin out on the lake and a ski boat.  It's a whole weekend of gaming and fun (one of the guys makes a fantastic mango salsa chicken).  I'm going to pull out Universalis for a session that weekend so we'll see how that goes.  It'll allow me to introduce a new game without sounding like I'm wanting to scrap a game they are enjoying.

As for the kids, yeah, they hang around us when we aren't gaming.  No, they don't go out for a beer with us or anything but we do lots of family-type stuff together and they are involved with that.  We don't tend to send all the kids to another room unless they just want to go and play themselves.  Still, your point is taken.  This is a bit different and I'm watching it pretty closely.  If this doesn't work, we'll come up with something else for them.

Noon,

I agree with you.  It isn't D&D's fault that it doesn't have the mechanics or structures that I'm looking for here.  What I'm wanting wasn't really part of their design goals.  D&D certainly does what it is designed to do well.  I'm just looking to add some to the system to address what I see as weaknesses.

John,

Yes, most of the flat social interaction is the result of soft situation-building.  I'm wanting some rules/guidelines for building situations, creating conflicts and resolving said conflicts.  

I don't want the resolution of social and political interactions to be totally resolved through GM-Player role-playing.  That just boils down to GM fiat.  I listen to what the player is doing/saying and then arbitrarily decide what happens.  I want the system to help handle that and at least give me a direction that I should follow.

Everyone,

Thanks for the help, btw.  Good stuff.

[jdagna]

A few general comments before I respond to the social interaction part...

First, I think the key with kids is basically the same as good gamemastering for adults, principally the following: the story has to move, it has to be relevant and it has to elicit player input.  The only difference between kids and adults is that adults will put up with three hours of boredom for an hour of interest; kids won't.  I'm by no means saying that you're suffering from this kind of problem, just suggesting that anything you'd consider good gamemastering is all that much more important.  Naturally, you'll want kid-appropriate conflicts.  I avoid plots that involve sex (including prostitutes, adultery, rape and sexual abuse), drugs (especially if the game setting or mechanics suggest taht they're good) and graphic violence or torture.

In Scene 3/4 you were concerned that Sean's character sat out until he was at full health, but you set up the dynamic that motivated him to do so.  Here they were, doing a routine chore, when they had a simple fight... only the fight turned out to be more difficult than they thought.  So you doubly-reinforced a pattern of escalation, in effect saying "No matter how safe you think it is, I can make it more dangerous at any time without warning."  Naturally, his reaction is to be at maximum strength at all times and I wouldn't be surprised to see him doing things like sleeping in his armor.  This is basically a social contract or trust issue - if you want to run the kind of game where they could be in danger at any given moment, you can't ask them to not be ready for it.  I don't know how the details of the scene worked out, but you might make sure the players get clues or perception chances to notice the bigger threats and you also might just assure them that certain situations are safe (in an "out of character" sense).  You could also give experience bonuses to people who act without undue paranoia.  (But don't give penalties, as I don't think it helps to punish a behavior without rewarding what you want).


Now, social stuff...

Personally, I think D&D 3/3.5 provides all the structure you need for a basic social system thanks to the core mechanic and a few relevant skills.  Here what's I'd do:

1) Start off by defining the different objectives in a conversation.  If there are no objectives, then don't bother with mechanics.  But most of the time people interact to get something - loyalty, friendship, money/goods, service, information or whatever.

2) Sketch out the relevant NPC personality.  I like to include a couple of quirks to make them memorable if they're important.  This personality should include alignment, but also less concrete elements - are they generally friendly?  do they like to help people?  do they value their position in society?  These are the kinds of things that will help you decide whether a player approach will appeal to them later.

3) If the people are meeting for the first time, you might do a first-impression check.  In D&D, I'd make this an unskilled check using Cha, with a DC set by the NPCs reaction to PC races, the value of the party's non-combat equipment (things like fine robes, crafted saddles, jewelry, etc) and on the party's reputation (good or bad).  This check will affect the DC of later interactions

4) Now they start talking.  Don't bother rolling until someone asks for something.  At that point, it's time for a roll.  Use any skills that seem appropriate (3/3.5 E have enough to get by on).  Set the DC based on the first impression and the reasonableness of the request.  For example "Give me your daughter" will go over less well than "I'm madly in love with your daughter and would like to marry her."  The results of the test show how the NPC views the request - whether he thinks it's reasonable, fair or whatever.

4a) Are the players lying?  If so, give the target a Wis save of some sort, using any applicable skills.  A success means the NPC is skeptical.

5) Now, the NPC decides what to do.  There are three basic options.  He can agree, disagree or counter-offer.  Note that the NPC makes his choice without a die roll - this social mechanic never forces anyone to do anything.  How do you do this as a GM?  Simple, think about the request from the NPCs viewpoint.  If you instantly know whether he'll accept or reject the offer, have him do so.  If you have to think about it, classify it as "probably yes" "maybe" and "probably no".  A success in step 4 will make a probably yes into a yes.  A maybe is going to require something extra (the counter offer) - "You can marry my daughter in a year if she still wants you."  A probably no requires something more extra - "You can marry my daughter, but you'll have to prove yourself first."  Of course, the NPC might not name a price themselves - "I'm not convinced your the right guy for my daughter."

6) At this point, the PCs either have what they want or they make a counter offer.  This offer can be based on a price named by the NPC or the PCs can volunteer something extra if the NPC left it vague.  With the deal sweetened, you go back to 4 and repeat until everyone agrees (or they kill each other).  If the NPC doesn't believe the players, the counter offer may have to include some sort of proof or guarantee.


What I like about this is that it doesn't interrupt the dialogue.  The rolls are there to determine the NPC impression of the player request, but they can't force the NPC to do something unreasonable and bad rolls can only increase the demands on the PCs, they'll rarely mean the PCs get rejected entirely.

[Andrew Cooper]

Justin,

Thanks for the reply.  Those are some really good thoughts, especially the ones concerning the kids.  I'll agree that kids will get bored before the adults and your insight on why Sean might have played the turtle until he was healed was spot on I think.  

I don't think I'll have much problem with the boredom part as most of my scene framing is pretty aggressive.  I don't do boring.  If it's boring, I skip it and move on.  The big issue there might be what he finds boring.  The whole social interaction, even with pretty high stakes, might be boring to him.  This means I'll have to remember to interperse more action scenes in the mix.

Your suggestions for the social aspects of the game seem like simply adopting Conflict Resolution rather than Task Resolution to me.  This is an excellent suggestion and one I've pretty much already adopted.  However, I disagree that D&D provides all the structure necessary.  Just switching from Task to Conflict Resolution is pretty significant drift and certainly isn't ever mentioned in the core rules anywhere.

I think after digesting these replies that my first attempt to modify the social/political rules is going to be to move from FatE to FitM with clearly defined Stakes in Conflict Resolution.  I think that requires the least amount of real rules editing on my part.  If that doesn't work the way I want, then I'm going to come up with some rules that resemble the Combat system for the Social interactions and shoe-horn them into play.