I have been really trying to understand social encounters and how to do them correctly and make them fun. I had an example and wanted to know what you thought about it.

-Players need to get it into a jail however a city watchman bars their way. The PC's would need to "influence" him 3 times ( his will power) in order for the guard to let them pass ?

-Player one chooses to talk to the guard ( PC's cannot gang up on NPC?) he says he his going to tell the guard he is also from the city watch , just another part of the city . so he would need to make a guile check ?

Lets say he is successful , would he then need to influence the guard in two different ( not using guile ) ways in order to succeed ? or can he just use guile for all his checks as long as he says something different?.

does anyone have an example of a social encounter were someone is actively trying to influence or shame the PCs back ?

One thing to watch out for is the PCs ganging up on a single NPC. It's definitely a loophole in the system that can be abused. There's no good solution for it in the rules-as-written... other than to just always present NPCs in groups, or put in some really hefty consequences for failure/chaos star so that PCs have to think twice about rolling if their Fellowship is low. It can get ugly.

If you're using just a single NPC, especially one as inconsequential as a random watchman, I don't recommend using a full Social Encounter. Just ask for a single Guile roll, evaluate the results rolled, and move on. Save the full-on Social Encounter rules for large, complicated scenes with multiple parties on each side.

For example: an NPC noble and his/her entourage (consisting of their spouse, herald, valet, and some guards) from whom the PCs have to seek favour or permission. Ultimately, only the noble and spouse need convincing, but the rest of the entourage may take actions to support their leader or act as barriers to advancement (maybe the guard cause 1 stress or party tension per turn).

That would make sense it could be tedious to make every social encounter take so long.

I am looking to have the more social characters in my group shine so the combat people don't have all the glory.

Agreed with above poster about not letting them gang up on a guy. Best to make their checks cooperative though. Sometimes they can act cooperatively (in this case). Sometimes, such as talking to a noble, the noble simply is not going to let more than one person influence them (the GM simply says NOPE, he's not listening to anyone but your leader).

Don't let PCs gang up on single social actions. On the otherhand, give each player something useful to do. In your example:

One player makes a guile check (to lie)

One player makes a skulduggery check (to distract him enough for the guile character maybe to get by without the guarding paying special attention to it)

Third player makes a charm (flirt) check, also just enough to distract the guard

This would be like other checks:

You are traveling on the road and need a good place to camp:

Player 1 - nature lore

Player 2 - intuition (estimate sums)

Player 3 - observation

Player 4 - leadership or charm (to keep up morale)

You won't always know what to use, so ask the players?

Here's a guide:

Convince a guard to let you by: cooperative checks

Convince a guard to let you by, but there's a line: individual check, each player can try ONCE

Intimidate a punk in a back alley to tell you why he's working for the skaven: gang up

Meet with the towns elected constable, who wants to hire you, but doesn't want to haggle prices: maybe two player characters

Meet with an elector count to beg for funding for a trip to the southlands: one player to beg, and one to give statistics (just like a sales presentation)

Talk your way out of paying taxes to enter a town: One, maybe two PCs.

Trick an audience into believing there is a ghost in the room: one to make the sound, one to jingle the bells, one to be a ventrilloquist, one to cast the cantrip.

jh