My players really are enjoying the social combat encounters...my question is this:

If I have 5 players engaging 1 adversary (say a noble they need to convince) would 1 successful "attack" move a progress counter forward on the tracker? Or would I count success?

Just trying to make it fair for the NPC as well

thoughts??

If I understand your question right: I'd probably count a single successful action as enough to move the tracker, modifying how far it moves based upon roleplaying.

For instance, if a player says "I try to convince him" and rolls dice, then I'd probably require multiple hammers and/or Boons to even move the tracker one space.

If a player says "I remember that his sister was taken hostage and killed by cultists, and remind him that the ones behind the fire may be the same group." I'd count any successful action as enough to move the tracker.

If a player actually plays it out, saying "Milord, it may be painful to recall that your own sister was once the victim of a cultist group. Though the chance is remote, it is possible that the culprits in your tragedy are the very same behind this fire! Any assistance you give us may well prove to bring down those responsible for that despicable act!" Then I'd probably move the tracker multiple spaces on a success, as many as 3, depending on the number of Boons or Hammers rolled.

I'd adjust my ruling depending on how it's being roleplayed.

If they are all essentially working together on the same basic argument, then one roll with extra [W] fortune dice to represent assistance.

However, if they are working multiple arguments at the same time, then an appropriate number of rolls, though perhaps with misfortune dice because they are dividing his attention and he cannot focus on one conversation.

As far as including the assistance die, I agree, but I'd add in one quick check. If this is a Noble being influenced by a rabble of those he sees as inferiors, then I'd have him roll a Discipline check to ignore all assistance dice, and possibly add misfortune.

The only reason for this comes from trips to the furniture store. Every now and then you get a pushy salesman who may have another salesman (or two) try to influence you into a purchase. It's sort of a strength-in-numbers routine. I find that any time this is tried on me, even if I was leaning toward a purchase, it makes me shop elsewhere. Sometimes, coming on strong with several people all trying to influence someone will activate their stubbornness.

It really depends on how you're tracking it.

If they are going against a nobleman (all against one) without any challenger I would suggest using a straight up linear tracker. The number of spaces would represent either a definitive end point (like an attack is coming or they have so much time to convince him before some other event happens or he has to see other people coming to his court), or how hard it will be to convince him would be represented by the steps they have to achieve before the scene ends (this could also be tracked by a time tracker held off to the side, moving it beat by beat in the scene (mostly after the players have made their points and his response to them, move the time tracker up one).

With that said, all players participate as they normally do, contributing to the conversation. However, as in normal dialogue, one player will state something and the next will support the argument, then another player jumps in. Whoever makes the point will get to roll the influence check, the others who supported his claim will also give a white die assist to his roll. For more obvious arguments have the actor (the guy who made the claim) use a contested resolution, using the Noble's skills and abilities and cunning to set the difficulty. For particularly hard points maybe do those rolls opposed, to make them have more dramatic emphasis on the check.

If the check succeeds, the token moves. Additional Boons, move the token again. Exceptionally great arguments or points that would appeal to the opponent, give them an additional move on the tracker. Bad, bad arguments or stupid statements could backslide the tracker (such as getting hostile against him for not understanding the situation or whatever.). Of course, always reward role-play more than dice. In addition, banes may not cause a backslide, but add black dice per bane to the next check.

Obvious arguments would obviously move the tracker so be prepared for some of those and be kind to the players good role-play. If they do particularly bad role-play or make a point or slip up in a lie, move the tracker the other way (you can offer a player an influence roll though to cover it up).

Recently, we did a sequence where players were being interrogated. I set up a ten spot tracker, no events, before the interrogators would kill them. Meanwhile, the few players who had avoided being captured came to rescue them. The captured players had a social challenge to stall the interrogators and not get killed before they were rescued. Both sides were racing against the same tracker and the longer the rescuers took to rescue them, the tracker moved up, but the players who were being interrogated could move the token back down based on their role-play. There was a lot of banter back and forth during the social challenge, but rolls were only made when points were hard (for me) to make a call if it was enough to convince or push the interrogators. Those critical points were key. One problem was the Troll Slayer kept speaking up and getting the rest of them in trouble and pushing the tracker up when he mouthed off and the other frantically tried to convince them otherwise. They had some ingenious stalls and misdirections and I couldn't clearly tell if the interrogator would fall for those misdirections, so the PC's made checks and based on the success the tracker moved as well as their argument. For example the Interrogators were looking for a boy believed to be possessed by Chaos. They told the interrogator that the boy was hidden in an abandoned church in the woods. This was a hard lie, so a roll was made. They rolled one boon and one success on the check. Obviously the stall works and works well. Plus I judge quickly, the interrogator is going to wait before "ending" them obviously just to make sure the boy is there and if he isn't would hopefully be able to "pry" the answer out of them. So based on the power of the argument I moved the token back three (one for the normal success, but two for how much of a delay it would be to go and check the woods and the church, reflecting where the Inquisitor was at.). It was a great call, and actually saved their lives. When the check was made though, the guy who started the lie was the one who rolled the Guile check while the others, who corroborated the story by speaking up quickly (and this was more than a yes, this was a strongly role-played explanation why they hid the boy etc.). Gave him a white die. They all participated in the role-play, but only one check was required (around the focus argument and the person who started it). That keeps the rolls to a minimal and the tracker under control. It was a party of four people being interrogated by the way. The situation went on beyond that, with other players starting up lies and tricks to keep themselves alive, and each one who started up a lie (like the example above), got to roll the dice, the rest had to role-play, but managed assists. Particularly strong or good lies I gave them bonus white for (as all rolls should be done) as well as additional moves on the tracker.

Hope that helped. Any questions, I'll be happy to reply.

Good Gaming.