Social Interaction Mechanics

[pwi874]

Has anyone noticed that there is no real robust social mechanic in Rifts?
There are two attributes Physical Beauty and Mental Affinity that do not have a value until you hit 16. Below that one can only assume that you have the persuasive power of a shrubbery.

There are a few skills that seem to cover niche application. Interrogation, seduction, barter.
While useful skills, they are not all that good for most social situations.

I would prefer some other method to ask questions then strapping someone to a chair and wiring parts of their anatomy for power.

I must assume that I either have not been able to find the section in the book that has goes over the game systems social mechanics or that it does not exist.

A social mechanic is the basic of basics in any game system.

Where might I find this in the Rifts system?

[eliakon]

Has anyone noticed that there is no real robust social mechanic in Rifts?
There are two attributes Physical Beauty and Mental Affinity that do not have a value until you hit 16. Below that one can only assume that you have the persuasive power of a shrubbery.

There are a few skills that seem to cover niche application. Interrogation, seduction, barter.
While useful skills, they are not all that good for most social situations.

I would prefer some other method to ask questions then strapping someone to a chair and wiring parts of their anatomy for power.

I must assume that I either have not been able to find the section in the book that has goes over the game systems social mechanics or that it does not exist.

A social mechanic is the basic of basics in any game system.

Where might I find this in the Rifts system?

There isn't an official one.
The short answer is "because Kevin always roleplayed out such things and didn't have you roll dice"
The long answer gets into more complex things that tend to boil down to the fact that when you put in such skills people tend to try and maximize them and then make 'social monsters' that like combat monsters can simply get their way in any situation. Or worse that simply try to reduce everything to "I ask around town for the answers. I have X, Y and Z so" *rolls* "Great, success what did I find"

[pwi874]

Has anyone noticed that there is no real robust social mechanic in Rifts?
There are two attributes Physical Beauty and Mental Affinity that do not have a value until you hit 16. Below that one can only assume that you have the persuasive power of a shrubbery.

There are a few skills that seem to cover niche application. Interrogation, seduction, barter.
While useful skills, they are not all that good for most social situations.

I would prefer some other method to ask questions then strapping someone to a chair and wiring parts of their anatomy for power.

I must assume that I either have not been able to find the section in the book that has goes over the game systems social mechanics or that it does not exist.

A social mechanic is the basic of basics in any game system.

Where might I find this in the Rifts system?

There isn't an official one.
The short answer is "because Kevin always roleplayed out such things and didn't have you roll dice"
The long answer gets into more complex things that tend to boil down to the fact that when you put in such skills people tend to try and maximize them and then make 'social monsters' that like combat monsters can simply get their way in any situation. Or worse that simply try to reduce everything to "I ask around town for the answers. I have X, Y and Z so" *rolls* "Great, success what did I find"

Thanks for the reply
While I agree that roll playing it out is the way to go, It is a roll playing game, without some mechanic in place to determine success it pretty much boils does to how persuasive the players in IRL. Most people do not play a RPG to play themselves, but to immerse themselves in a fantasy world where they can be someone else for a short while, someone who may be more charming. Skills are a reflection of the character they want to be not the player they are.

I have not found that other RPG systems have a great deal of problems with social skills forcing the direction of play overmuch. I would think not having skill check at all to roll would result in failure as a default being more common. This would result in far more forced situations then social situations.

Without some mechanic in place to help determine events like talking your way past guards, charming the needed information out of some old lady, would depend on your Personal social skills.

I don’t know about you but I don’t want to rely upon my personal skills. If I had to I should just roll up a combat monster because that where all the social situations are ending up, in combat.

In the end it is still up to the Game Master to determine the effectiveness of any social encounter. They are able to adjust the difficulty up or down based upon the situation. GMs are also able to set limits on just how much the NPCs will give up, or do. This is no different of a situation as any other game. The only difference is other games included a roll mechanic to help it along.

That all being said, if you were to implement a social skills system to Rifts, do you have an idea how you would go about it?

At a base, everyone has some degree of social skills, the ability to lie, persuade, and determine others truthfulness and sincerity. Others no doubt will hone those skills to a sharper edge.

Any idea?

[eliakon]

I have used Acting skill to replicate things like "fast talk"
I have a thoroughly house brewed up version of the MA rules that I use that assign a trust number to everyone and modify it based on situations, and the like
(I have also ditched Physical Beauty for what that's worth)
I also tend to be a highly cinematic GM, in the "roll and shout" mode for things where I don't have a rule.
If the Player wants to do something I will often have them describe what they want, then have them roll a d20 or d100 and then judge the results as I go, privileging the story and dramatics. Thus if you want to try and get the school girl you just met to open up to you and tell you about the mysterious strangers at the afterschool club... tell me how you do it. A good story is going to need less of a roll than a wacky one.

[ShadowLogan]

I must assume that I either have not been able to find the section in the book that has goes over the game systems social mechanics or that it does not exist.

They don't exist. (even how the M.A. and P.B. Trust/Intimidate and Charm/Impress "ability" isn't detailed, IIRC there is something buried in N&SS somewhere, but it might not be how its supposed to work as it was connected with a Chi power)

You are supposed to ROLE-PLAY out those situations, not ROLL-PLAY (there is a difference). This it can be subject to GM and player interactions with regard to the characters participating, it can be frustrating (I use a yes/no dice approach when I don't have a preference to resolve issues like this) and seem a bit to arbitrary for some.

A social mechanic is the basic of basics in any game system.

Yes it is. However the social mechanic is supposed to be handled by ROLE-PLAYING, not ROLL-PLAYING (there is a difference). Keep in mind that the Palladium system is a fairly old system that has only seen minor changes over 30years, so in this respect you might want to compare it to older systems rather than modern ones (I know Fuzion and D20 have social skills, but I don't remember social skills in what little I was exposed to in AD&D 2E where role-playing was involved and the AD&D 2E system is in that age range IINM)

Palladium puts out Role-playing games, not Roll-playing games.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The only example about how the MA % (and hint for the PB %) is used is in the Ninja & Superspies book in the Warrior's Spirit Kate text. In that the other char has to roll over your char's % to not be effected by it.

Some here think this is only the mechanic for the Warrior's Spirit Kata. They are spirited about their insistence and I'm not going to argue about it.

This is not settled rules, there is no consensus about this. This is because there is no Defining canon text that says "This is how to use the MA/PB %"


There is an article in the rifters about how to use a char's MA % at a macro-scale in a story. However, it does not have any text about the individual scale mechanics.

[pwi874]

You are supposed to ROLE-PLAY out those situations, not ROLL-PLAY (there is a difference). This it can be subject to GM and player interactions with regard to the characters participating, it can be frustrating (I use a yes/no dice approach when I don't have a preference to resolve issues like this) and seem a bit to arbitrary for some.

By that logic Combat should just be Role-Played out. No one would really suggest giving up your players’ ability to determine his fate in a gun battle to mere a story narrative between you and the GM. That would rob the players of their agency and at that point you might as well go watch a movie and just enjoy someone else’s story.

When you break it down social situations are just like combat. Two or more sides each with goals and objectives, victory and loss, each with rewards and penalties. It’s Social Combat, the war of words not of actions. Just like physical combat, social combat would have rules and mechanics to determine the outcome of and encounter.

I never suggested that a simple die roll would replace role-playing, nor should it. Just as in combat the moves one makes can drastically effect the outcome of any situation.

Keep in mind that the Palladium system is a fairly old system that has only seen minor changes over 30years, so in this respect you might want to compare it to older systems rather than modern ones (I know Fuzion and D20 have social skills, but I don't remember social skills in what little I was exposed to in AD&D 2E where role-playing was involved and the AD&D 2E system is in that age range IINM)

If memory serves AD&D 2e was not designed to be much more than a Hack-and-Slash dungeon crawl experience. Any social system was restricted to doing barter in towns to pawn off your party’s loot.

Rifts has a much more developed world (then original AD&D), huge amounts of material is devoted to explaining the social dynamic between varies groups, and the world at large. It clearly needs a developed social mechanic to help. Nothing will ever replace role playing for the telling of the story, the mechanic just help determine the Characters success, not the Players.

[eliakon]

You are supposed to ROLE-PLAY out those situations, not ROLL-PLAY (there is a difference). This it can be subject to GM and player interactions with regard to the characters participating, it can be frustrating (I use a yes/no dice approach when I don't have a preference to resolve issues like this) and seem a bit to arbitrary for some.

By that logic Combat should just be Role-Played out. No one would really suggest giving up your players’ ability to determine his fate in a gun battle to mere a story narrative between you and the GM. That would rob the players of their agency and at that point you might as well go watch a movie and just enjoy someone else’s story.

When you break it down social situations are just like combat. Two or more sides each with goals and objectives, victory and loss, each with rewards and penalties. It’s Social Combat, the war of words not of actions. Just like physical combat, social combat would have rules and mechanics to determine the outcome of and encounter.

I never suggested that a simple die roll would replace role-playing, nor should it. Just as in combat the moves one makes can drastically effect the outcome of any situation.

Keep in mind that the Palladium system is a fairly old system that has only seen minor changes over 30years, so in this respect you might want to compare it to older systems rather than modern ones (I know Fuzion and D20 have social skills, but I don't remember social skills in what little I was exposed to in AD&D 2E where role-playing was involved and the AD&D 2E system is in that age range IINM)

If memory serves AD&D 2e was not designed to be much more than a Hack-and-Slash dungeon crawl experience. Any social system was restricted to doing barter in towns to pawn off your party’s loot.

Rifts has a much more developed world (then original AD&D), huge amounts of material is devoted to explaining the social dynamic between varies groups, and the world at large. It clearly needs a developed social mechanic to help. Nothing will ever replace role playing for the telling of the story, the mechanic just help determine the Characters success, not the Players.

But what many people forget is that the Palladium game engine is, at its heart based off of a house ruled AD&D campaign
There is a REASON that it has the dice set up it does, and the skills are done the way they are.
The original PF game had no social system at all. And thus the follow on games didn't have any.
It has grown yes, and there have been additions and changes...
...but the core hasn't changed and thus things that were never defined at the core are sometimes still undefined.

Or put another way...
...The canon doesn't have the answers you seek. There are various unofficial materials of varying levels and of course you can create your own house rules. But the canon system was written under certain assumptions and those assumptions are still in effect.

[ShadowLogan]

If memory serves AD&D 2e was not designed to be much more than a Hack-and-Slash dungeon crawl experience. Any social system was restricted to doing barter in towns to pawn off your party’s loot.

Rifts has a much more developed world (then original AD&D), huge amounts of material is devoted to explaining the social dynamic between varies groups, and the world at large. It clearly needs a developed social mechanic to help. Nothing will ever replace role playing for the telling of the story, the mechanic just help determine the Characters success, not the Players.

I can't say that my XP with AD&D2E was a hack-and-slash in the few times I played in it (I don't even own books for the system). Ultimately with Palladium and 2E AD&D though the social interaction of characters (PC and NPC) are supposed to be handled by the players/GM themselves, allowing for a more (IMHO) you-get-what-you-put-in-out experience, unlike some more modern systems that are more rigid like a computer/video game (which tend to be highly restricted in choices).

[Alrik Vas]

AD&D2e had social rules, it had NPC reaction adjustment. If you spoke the language, you could literally talk a group of bloodthirsty goblins out of mugging you and get them to invest money in you to represent their business interests in the town over.

It was all there, but most groups didn't use it because life is so much simpler when you murder hobo your way across the countryside/dungeon without any sort of consequence. That's really not the game's fault. It's that most of us were 12 when we started playing, and even those of us who were all about "a great story" still threw forced encounters of "can you kill this? you rotten little players who keep messing with my story!?" because combat is fun.

Bottom Line here, there's a point where you're playing above your character's capability. If you have IQ 9, ME 9, MA 9...you are about average, maybe even on the low side of it. If you end up being the group leader and constantly push off the wiles of the femme fatale, figure out the enemy plot from very misleading clues and constantly talk your way into and out of situations as needed...you are essentially breaking contract with the game.

People do, "well i roleplayed it, so it's fine" and sure...sure...some GM's give you a gold star and if it works for you awesome. Though once upon a time, in a game with very well structured social rules, i had a player (who was usually the GM) say, "i'm not taking all those skills, I'll just roleplay my way through things."

I almost slapped him, I kid you not. If the character isn't played to represent their capabilities, you're basically cheating. That's not to say you are straight-jacketed, it's YOUR character still, but really consider the implications here.

[ShadowLogan]

The problem with "social skills" is that in some respects everyone has them. You don't really need a skill to engage in Barter, Interrogation, Bluffing, Intimidating, etc. What those skills generally represent is that you are BETTER AT IT than an average person. Look at the Physical Skill Climbing. Anyone (w/n reason) can climb, but someone with the Climbing Skill gets a "save" if they fail their check (among other things), unlike an unskilled climber (which makes the person with the skill better than the person w/o it, even though they both can do it).

Skills like this are a double edged sword though. In some respects they can help speed the story along, but they can also throw a monkey wrench into it at the same time. The Players could be asking the right questions with the right people, but because the fail the checks don't get the information (or worse the reverse). So the skills have their uses, but they should be used to compliment what the players are doing (or allow the players to asses the information) and not take the place of actual interactions.