Do you allow NPC's to make opposed checks vs the PC's if an NPC tries to sway a PC? Or do always allow the PLayers to decide on their own?

Thanks!

If a NPC uses a social skill on a PC I expect the player to respect the outcome through role playing. It would be the same if they refused to respect that blaster bolt hitting them in the face. For social skills to have any real meaning, they must be respected the same way as combat skills.

If a NPC uses a social skill on a PC I expect the player to respect the outcome through role playing. It would be the same if they refused to respect that blaster bolt hitting them in the face. For social skills to have any real meaning, they must be respected the same way as combat skills.

As a player, some of the most fun you have is when you absolutely know that you're screwed, but your character would have no clue. Playing a character being tricked into a terrible situation makes the absurd string of luck that gets you back out even more exciting.

This is one of those social contract issues that should be worked out with the group in advance of playing. There is no one true way that is correct, and your group should make sure everyone is on the same page for what they all expect to happen.

I have never used a social skill to make a PC act a certain way. I won't say that I would never do it, but I don't like others making decisions for PCs (unless they are dominated or something).

Honestly, when the moment when you're going to probably use social skills against your PCs is if they ask "Do I think he's lying?" In that case, they'll roll their Discipline against the enemy's Deception. And NPCs can use Coercion on the PCs, to which I'd make the effect some setback dice if their Discipline vs. Coercion was unsuccessful.

It really comes down to the GM trying to sway the player instead of characters within the game universe reacting to each other according to the dice. A GM is rarely going to sway the player, especially with long time friends who have been gaming for years. The player always knows more than the character as far as meta-gaming goes. He can guess where the story is going, how the GM tends to operate, and make solid, logical decisions based in real-world common sense. However, the player is not playing THEMSELF in the game, they're playing a character in a story. This is exactly why we have social skill checks in the game. A fear check is a good example, a player is not actually going to be afraid when you describe the giant Rancor running them down - the character is.

Conversely, the character usually knows more than the player "in-game" and this is the reason we have knowledge skill checks. The player may not know that this particular rancor is just a misunderstood pet coming to play with them - the character might.

I feel if you limit Social Skill checks and Knowledge checks and lean on the player's own reactions and Star Wars trivia they themselves know, you limit the gameplay.

I'd use social skills for my NPCs, it's PCs using them against each other I don't tend to approve of. Removal of agency from a player by the GM is sometimes needed for story reasons, etc, but I dislike the idea of one player taking it from another.

Do you allow NPC's to make opposed checks vs the PC's if an NPC tries to sway a PC?

The short answer: no.

The longish answer: the PCs are the protagonists, and like a protagonist in a fictional drama, they are usually the active party, the petitioner, in a dramatic scene -- they are the ones who want something from the NPCs, played by the GM, who gets to decide how they will respond. If the NPC can go either way, or if there' something interesting at stake, something the GM feels the PCs (not necessarily the players) should earn by virtue of their social skills, then he might call for a roll.

In the rare converse situation, where an NPC is the petitioner, is the player's pleasure to decide how or if his PC will acquiesce. If a roll is called-for in this case, it is usually because the PC has taken a more active roll: to determine if the NPC is being deceptive or perhaps turn the tables and become the petitioner, perhaps demanding a little quid pro quo. Or maybe there is an audience, and it has become a social contest where the prize is not the assent of the other party, but of the crowd's unanimous approval.

As an aside, social skill rolls are really for procedural scenes, not dramatic ones. Convincing the doorman to let you inside the club: procedural; arguing with your girl once inside: dramatic.