Sample Social Encounter
[This encounter is set in a lounge during dinner on luxury river liner]

The players enter the lounge for the evening meal. There is one empty table in the corner. Most of the other tables are full with just one or two seats left at each one. The serving staff is bring drinks and light snacks for the guests. A light ballad over shadows the dinner conversation.

The player wish to extract some information form some of the dinner guests. [Roll For Initiative] The players split up with two the players going to the table of Herbort Klemper and three dinner companions.

Herbort Klemper is an obnoxious merchant from Wissenburg. He is overweight, and ostentatiously dress with no style of then costly. He will fawn on those above him and insult those below. He is vain, arrogant, cowardly, loud, tactless, and often vulgar.

+++++

[The progress tracker for this table has 4 space, an event, 4 space, and then another event. There is another progress tracker for the length of the dinner and for other tables. Chaos Stack moves the tracker 2 spaces, 2 banes for the player or 2 boons for the NPC move the tracker 1 space. The players start on the first space of the track and the NPC token starts on the second space.]

+++++

When the Aldric , the student, sets down at the table [Free Manoeuvre: Engage], the conversation is mainly about traveling and the weather. Aldric being somewhat shy about butting in to the conversation flashes is warm smile [Action Card: Winning Smile, Stance: +1-Conservative]. Aldric's smile seems to put Herbort at ease [<P>{CC}<BBB>*S**S**S*(G)*B*[W]{N}, Influences Herbort (moves the tracker one space to the right), Herbort delays attacking Aldric for 1 round, Aldric recovers 1 stress] and this relieves some of the tension.

Erhardt , the scout, having spent most of his youth outside and alone uses his knowledge of the local geography to join the conversation [Folklore vs. Folklore <PP>{C}{CC}<BBB>*S**S*(G)*S*[Y]*C*, 1 *S* using the comet, move the tracker to the right]. Only Erhardt's years of experience allow him to join the conversation so easily.

Herbort begins to tell what he believes is a fascinating story about his trip to Nuln [Exclusive Conversation: Charm vs. WP, <P>{C}<BBB>*S**B**B*®{B}[Y]*B*[W]*S*, 1 *S* add 2 [bB] to social tests against him for 1 round, and two *BB* moves the NPC's tracker one space to the right].

The other dinner guests laughing join in the story from Herbort [boisterous Agreement: Charm vs. WP, <PPP>{BB}{S}{B}<BB>*B**S*[WW], 1 success adds 1 to social attacks against the target and 1 [W] for social attacks from the target, 2 {BB} moves the players token one space to the right (this is the space next to the first event space)].The other dinner guests are making it hard for Herbort to remember his place in the story, but they are also making openings for the players to ask their questions.

Erhardt [Changes Stance +1C] seeing the opening ask Herbort in a nonchalant way, if he saw anything suspicious last night [Charm vs WP +2 , <PPPP>{C}{CC}{B}{C}(GG)*SD}*SD}[bBB]{B}{C}, two {BB} moves the NPC's tracker one space to the right (this is the space next to the first event space)]. Herbort is somewhat annoyed by the interuption. Erhardt [second Manoeuvre: Assists Aldric +[W], +1 Stress] points out a guest sitting at another table.

Aldric is feeling the pressure now. He must succeed or lose the chance to get a some use full information before the event is triggered. Because of Aldric's smile he is immune to Herbort's tall tale [Exclusive Conversation]. Aldric [Changes Stance +1C] using a little white lie says 'I know that guy over there (The same guy that Erhardt pointed out earlier), did you see him last night?' [Guile vs. WP, <PP>{C}{C}<BB>*S**B*(GG)*S**B*[Y][WW]*B**S* {B}, 2 *B* moves the players token to the first event space].

Herbort tells the players that he saw Karl (the guy at the other table) coming out of the pursuer's office late last night and that he was really sweating. Herbort says "something may have happened, but it is not as importent as the food."

The event triggers the arrival of food and the encounter continues...

+++++

Homemade social action cards:

Social Action – Exclusive Conversation : 1 success adds 2 to social attacks, 3 success adds 4 to social attacks.
Social Action – Boisterous Agreement : 1 success adds 1 to social attacks against the target and 1 [W] for social attacks from the target.

Interesting work up

Jay h

Great work! Wondered how to run social encounters, this makes sense! Thanks!

This is a good example of how to run a 'social combat' encounter.

I think that FFG really dropped the ball when it came to this aspect of the game - there is no 'basic' social action cards to play and there are no social condition cards to affect characters with.

The whole social combat concept struggles with its identity at the moment, with a lot of confusion over wether or not someone can attempt something their is a card for; I might not have the card for 'winning smile' does that mean I cannot smile at someone? ok, a slightly absurd example, but it highlights a problem within the RAW.

Here is my concept of the Basic Social Action to Lie. I believe everyone should start with some basic social actions.
The skill check is not a very satisfying method for resolving social encounters. This basic action is weaker then Honeyed words the action card.

Title: The Lie - Reckless
Action Type: Support
Traits: Basic, Social
Recharge Rating: 0
Difficulty Modifier:
Action check: Guile (Fel) vs. Intuition (Int)
Requirements: Target can hear and understand you
Special Guidelines: for each target after the first
Success Lines: *S* = Influence Target and [bB] on the next Social Action; *SSS* = Influence Target
Side Effects: {B} = 1 Stress; {BB} = [bB] on next Social Action

Title: The Lie - Conservative
Action Type: Support
Traits: Basic, Social
Recharge Rating: 0
Difficulty Modifier:
Action check: Guile (Fel) vs. Intuition (Int)
Requirements: Target can hear and understand you
Special Guidelines: for each target after the first
Success Lines: *S* = Influence Target and 2 Recharge tokens on a GM choose of Social Action; *SSS* = Influence Target
Side Effects: {B} = 1 Recharge Token; 3 Recharge Token

I don't use basic actions in the same sense; rather for the majority of my social encounters (true encounters where initiative takes place, there is a give and take, etc.) use the following results for non-action card checks:

1 success = +1 fortune to next roll

2 successes = successfully influence

2 boons = +1 fortune to next check

2 banes = opponent gains +1 fortune to their next check

Comet = successfully influence target

Chaos star = opponent gains 1 social defense (opponents add misfortune) for 1 full round.

This makes the social action cards quite a bit more powerful, is simple to remember and manage, doesn't require cards, and allows PCs with social action cards to shine.

MJ:

You should do a PDF of this and put it up on the Hammerzeit site.

Jay H

Isn't the Perform a Stunt action the basic action for all skill checks? I can see that getting used a lot in social encounters.

Rorschach Six said:

As far as I'm aware - a skill check within the 'encounter' mode is covered under a manuver. It is the very last item on the list. I like the idea of 'basic social actions' but am trying to find a easier method to 'make the cards' necessary so my players can have them! lol

I do not think that Perform a Stunt is the right card as it says "Use this action to apply a skill in an unusual way, or to attempt a dramatic or story-driven activity not covered by a specific action card." This really does not sound like what I want to use in a social encounter.

As to using a skill, I believe a skill check as a maneuver is somewhat boring. I think that maneuvers should be limited to small activities, but major encounter effecting activities should be actions. So if you lie in passing while chasing a bad guy that is a maneuver, but if you walk in to a bar and the hold place stops and flash a smile that is action (winning smile). So I believe there should be basic actions for social encounters.

Some people will abstract away everything except combat, but I enjoy the other stuff so I will try to enhance it.

How about resolving a more free from approach, like if I want the players to act their PC part to the NPCs played by me as a GM, and the players have to keep the conversation flowing and convince me of whatever they want. Too many checks during the conversation would break the flow and I'd rather just calculate in the end how well their acting convinced my NPCs and then make one or two checks based on that. How would one resolve that?

@Turrican: Personally, I'm with you. too many rolls just to talk about the weather seems tedious . Everyone get to use basic skills even if they are not trained in them so no one actually needs a card like "Sweet Talk: Talk sweetly and you might just get your way Big Boy" to wench (although that might be useful in real life) or a card called "Lie" to try to lie to someone convincingly, but if you want to make things more complex you can house them and morganj has given an example of one really well thought out way to do that, that's cool too. Despite my preferences, we should let the players decide how the conversations go, if they are having fun rolling lots of dice and thinking of clever ways to use all their skills to gain an advantage then cool, but if they don't like rolling dice everytime they want to smile then that is cool too. Obviously, I super hate 4ed DND skill challenges (warning: minor rant) nobody should have to make six successes before three failures based on six skills of no real relevance or relation to pump a ghost for informationreal example from the DMG. Plus if you have to write a monthly column about how to adjudicate them then something is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

@turrican & bindlespin.

I couldn't agree more with the idea of making something like social interactions as fluid as possible with minimal checks and statistics.

Though there's different strokes for different folks.If your group possess people with imagination and social grace (fortunately mine do) you really don't need all the intricate dice rolls to resolve conversations, they can really mess with the ebb and flow. A guile check here there and an action card for some mechanical flavour is more then enough in my experience.

On the other hand for people who are less inclined to have a fluid conversation and want to depend more on statistics to resolve social dynamics. Go nuts with the dice! This game offers that flexibility. Though I find that makes social encounters, which let's face it is a big aspect of roleplaying, more statistical and strategic as opposed to good ol RP and being in character yourself, not your dice playing your character.

And @ those who are upset FFG didn't include clear concise rules for "social encounter mode" well this game has been built on an abstract versatile frame where you can essentially apply different tracking mechanisms and dice pools to make them as intricate as you want.

I think people looking for very complex and detail oriented social encounters that are explained by official rules are playing the wrong game here.

FFG hats off to you
/end-wall-text

My thoughts:

Social Encounters

Transferring combat encounter concepts and keeping it loose and roleplay focussed.

Abstract Range (with nod to the original post concept of "engaging").

Social encounters may use range to indicate the “difficulty engaging” with a subject which is less physical distance and more the nature of the situation, the crowd, how many others are talking to them already, how long it takes to bring conversation around to where you want.

For example, first entering the bar or ballroom, you may be at long range from the officer you want to question and from the wizard whose advice you want. Each of them may medium from each other. In another situation, you may start at close range such as when you walk up to the guard on the street.

Engaging is required to influence, again not necessarily representing physical space but a social engagement.

In social encounters, extra manoeuvres cost stress not fatigue. You can gradually open up banter, start questioning or seducing or you can move quickly at cost of some stress.

Actions may be used to close distance more quickly against an Easy (1d) difficulty as a rule (e.g., use Charm, Education or Folklore to banter, open up conversation, get someone to move off), a more formal setting may add a misfortune die to this action. Use Perform a Stunt for these actions (note that 3 successes allow another manoeuvre again) - (BTW, something similar would apply in combat encounters)

Actions:

Any action “against, to influence” the other is an attack for purposes of card effects. Poor or good roleplaying is particularly likely to result in misfortune and fortune dice being applied.

Charm (Fel) vs Discipline checks can be used to influence targets but in social encounters must be made as Actions rather than manoeuvres.

The action is roleplayed and a basic opposed skill check may influence a target one step on a progress tracker with Perform a Stunt being used where the social interaction is particularly dramatic.

The Winning Smile action card does the same but with more advantageous possibilities (a success bonus, possibly influencing twice in one action, andno single bane result), though it must be the opening action of the social encounter per card requirements.

Groups

The effect of three people talking at once is not as great as 3 attacking at once. Situations will vary but there may be a limit on the number of "social attacks" per round with others having to perform assistance or take other indirect steps.

Progress Trackers

The basic consideration for a "win/persuade" progress track is the target's Willpower, modified by reasonableness etc. of the outcome from their perspective. Another for the PC can also be created to indicate by NPC successes or movement due to chaos star or double banes on PC actions the PC's movement towards exhausting/losing argument. It's length should also be influenced by the PC's Willpower (in a group different PC willpowers simply mean a different point when that PC is "knocked out" of the social encounter). These progress tracks are effectively the "wounds" each side has. Each should have a "concession" point making it likely that in close outcome an argument is not won entirely (in keeping with the idea of multidimensional outcomes in this game and borrowing concepts from Burning Wheel).

How's that look?

Rob

It looks great to me !Thanks a lot. That's simple, smart, and close to combat encounter.

Willpower = difficulty and tracker's base length, dice test = action not manoeuver, extra manoeuver = stress.

As for those who say they want to keep the social part of game freeform. I do not think that what I have described is very cumbersome. It did involve dice rolling and PCs declaring what they were saying to influence the NPCs. I think of WFRP as more then just a combat sim.

I like the suggestion of using perform a stunt, since there are no basic social actions. I also agree that actions should be use to influence NPCs and that skill should be for trivial acts.

Using WP as a guide to setting the length of the influence track is a good idea. I have found that the PC's track feels too long at 6 spaces and then an event. So if WP was used as a guide it would mostly be around 3-4 and then an event space. I have not had an NPC track reach the event space yet, so it could be too long.

morganj said:

Well, I personally don't think your system is cumbersome, it's just to mechanical for my taste. Doesn't mean it's wrong.

Though whats your point of thinking WFRP as more then just a combat sim? Isn't the best way to simulate a real conversation is by having a real conversation? lol.

Adding all these statistics, counters and dice rolls, essentially micro-managing would make it more of a simulation as opposed to "freeform".

Do you roll dice before and while talking to people?

On the other hand your implementation of a statistical social encounter is top notch! I'm just really having problems how a lack of social dice rolls makes WFRP more of a combat sim.

Cheers

Boze said:

I tend to do exactly what you sayjust simulating a real convo by having that convounless the NPC is somehow invested in opposing the PCs. At that point, I roll dice. I mainly do that out of fairness. I've got firm biases because of my background, and the same sorts of arguments tend to persuade me each and every time. But my NPCs are different people, persuaded by different things. The dice help keep my own biases in check and make sure that I'm treating my players fairly when they're trying to talk an NPC into or out of something.

Boze said:

The best way to simulate a sword fight may be to have an actual duel, but thankfully, we have mechanics to fall back on so that that isn't necessary. Just as in real life I am not a great swordsman, but an RPG allows me to simulate that I am, I may not be a great debater, charming rogue, or super intelligent scholar, but this game has rules and mechanics to allow me to play a character who is. f you force me to "roleplay" social interactions rather than use mechanics to simulate my character's skills, then he is as limited in his abilities as I am. Many RPGs spend a lot of page count on the combat simulation. Thankfully, WFRP gives us mechanics for social encounters as well. Hopefully, The Gathering Storm will have several examples of these rules in action to give us all a better idea of how construct social encounters of our own.

Yup, I'm hoping to see more examples in published products or web-site add ons of how they use rules in social encounters.

What I want is something of a "skeleton" to guide designing encounter (e.g., length of progress track), keep characters with social actions at front of usefulness but no lock out others etc., and keep results interesting/multidimensional not just "yes/no"/"pass/fail". Roleplay heavy yes, say what you're saying, roleplay it. Just saying it's Charm at work period? Boatload of misfortune dice right there. On the other hand, the Player who trained Charm, put a specialization relevant to it in it, chose a social action card - should see return on that.

Rob

mac40k said:

Yes but you have missed my point, I stated earlier that I enjoyed the mechanical implementation of social elements but just chose not to do it. Fortunately my players and I are adept at social situations, improv etc. Thus roleplaying social situations with minimal dice rolls is possible in my group, but not necessarily everyone elses.

And yes you said it yourself, "The best way to simulate a sword fight may be to have an actual duel". Thats what LARP is (live action roleplay) happens in the summer every sunday right by my place here. It is roleplaying but instead of rolling dice you actually Duel!

Tabletop Roleplaying to Social Encounters is LARP to Combat Encounters. We can actually simulate them!

Bringing me back to my point, less dice rolls on social encounters does NOT make this game more combat oriented.

mac40k said:

During a sword fight in the game you still have to come up with clever manouvres and best ways to use the characters skill, you can't just say "I make a clever tactical manouver" or "I use the enviroment to my advantage", you still have to say what it is your PC actually does. I'd say the same thing applies to social encounters, you can't just say "I compliment the NPC", you have to at least say what it is you say, do you admire the watch captain's horse or do you pretend not to notice the horrible wart in the beggar woman's nose. I think that'd be the minimum requirement.

The good thing about this game (or RPG's in general) is that the rules allow you to pause and think for a moment. When it comes to the game I currently run, the players certainly like to babble, and it's a nice way to release tension after a dice-heavy fight. It's a lot of fun though and I wouldn't want to subject my players to a lot of dice rolling and card flipping in mid-conversation, it'd be less fun. So, I don't know if a free form approach is the most correct one, going strictly by the rules, but it's the approach that suits best for my group. Since we already have an example of a more detailed by-the-book approach to social encounters in the first post, I'd want to know how to play out a more free form approach. Surely the 3rd edition rules are flexible enough to handle that as well?

Turrican said:

Yep. That's how I run things and how I think about them, too. There's intellectual skill in both fighting and RP, and if you can't manage it, you won't do very well in my group even if your stats are high.

I suppose it's all in how you approach the game. Personally, I think the pleasure of roleplay is in the intellectual puzzle-solving: you must figure out how to respond to social situations, you must figure out how to respond to combat situations tactically, and you must put everything you hear together to figure out the flow of the main narrative. If you succeed at most of what you attempt on paper because you've minmaxed your numbers, but you personally don't have the mental ability to put the pieces together yourself and understand or participate in the subtleties, where's the fun?

I have played in groups for whom the main fun was 'winning' by figuring out how to minmax numbers so that they could plow through the game and make it to the end with as few obstacles as possible, which the GM countered by throwing the most hideous monsters possible at them. I completely see how that kind of fun works, it just isn't for me, especially since it requires so much fiddling with numbers up front.

I wouldn't say either approach is wrong; they're just different. Ultimately, you just want to make sure that you're not one kind of player stuck in another kind of group!

Turrican said:

I haven't had the chance to do a real social encounter yet with my group and since both players in my group are dwarfs with no social encounter action cards they wont be used a lot for the near future. But I want my players to get involved in a social encounter where they will feel that they might have done better if they had had the help of a 'Winning smile' or similar. When that time comes when they acquire some social action cards my plan is to run it as follows. Mainly we will converse like people really do (as Boze's group does) but I magine that a player can 'boost' an argument or lie with an action card letting them roll for the cards results and if they have successes I will add that into my consideration of how well I deem the players to have done in the conversation (after all not all players can hope to be as eloquent as their charcters might be. For instance who can really play the level of intelligence a wizard might posses). This also means that I will ignore the recharge numbers on social cards and let players use them when appropriate instead of every few tunrs. For instance it would be logical to only use a staring contest once per social encounter. If they want to use honeyed words they must speak the lie or the things they think the NPC wants to hear and then they can use the card to boost their influence. if they want to use it again in the same conversation they must tell a different lie or suck up in a different way else it will have the opposite effect.

The reason I want to use the social cards at all is for character balance. if players are not gonna spend some action points on social cards then they must learn that their skills at conversation are lacking as opposed to players who do take them and will similarly be weaker or less versatile in combat. Otherwise there will be less reason for players to play smart social characters. I like there to be the option for many encounters to be 'solved' by social skills. or a good mix of both types. after all every player needs his thunder, his 15 minutes of fame.

I'm only using social combat for pivotal conversations where success has a significant effect on the progress of the adventure. The rest is just conversation. In Eye for an Eye I ended running just one social combat.