@sunnyj The main requirement is to be extremely simple and not interrupt the scene's flow.
If either of those conditions isn't true then a social system will simply not see use in day-to-day scenes, which renders it nearly useless.
If I need to consult an arcane table of modifiers and spend ten minutes talking over pages with people to see how far my PC's minor manipulation attempt got him then it's almost certain I won't bother with it.
Anyone else kind of annoyed the Venom movie looks like will have no connections to Spider-man at all?
Aside from OMG COMICS CONTINUITY the symbiote won't be obsessed with Peter, there won't be a reason for all the spider motifs (logo on the chest, webs), etc.
Also I'm not crazy about using the old copout for the origin story they seem to be using: it was an evil mad scientist CEO who did it.
@faraday said in Social Systems:
Sorry for double post but I missed this before... What you describe is the norm on the consent games I've played. You can always TRY to manipulate me, but I have to give my consent to BE manipulated.
I don't understand that. On those games you need to give your consent to be punched, too, but no one is (or seems to be) making the argument physical skills shouldn't exist.
I think the issue here is a combination of a high overhead in making social plots compared to making physical ones, which devalues the former even when it comes to using them on NPCs, and pure stigma; far more cases have been recorded where assholes tried to abuse Manipulate to get others to play out stuff they didn't want than Brawl.
I still think we haven't seen this done right yet. It takes a combination of staff who set the culture right from the start, a system built around having social skills around in the first place instead of them being plugged in as an afterthought, and a culture where they are simply valued. Not tolerated, not forced, but wanted.
@enoch Interesting. A mostly consent-based game? Cool.
@jaded Oh sure, they could run Maximum Carnage or whatever (although I bet you Carnage will end up being the generic evil scientist CEO guy from the trailer in the first movie).
But even then there'll be no personal connection. Peter won't feel guilty about the symbiote since, well, he won't have had a hand in releasing it into the world... Venom and Carnage will simply be just... villains to him, same as any other.
I feel it's a missed opportunity. Spidey plotlines work best when there's guilt involved.
@surreality said in Social Systems:
If people took the same approach to the seduction attempt as they did to the combat -- namely, it's not a 'one shot and I get everything I want the way I want it' -- things would be different. For example, it's going to take a bunch of punches for most people to go down as described above. How about 'I'm going to make a roll to see if I can get your character's attention in a positive way' first?
Right, so since we are discussing social systems (rather than whether to have any) let's see what we could come up with that can address this issue.
The way I see it a primary problem here is quantifying social 'damage' (maybe let's call it influence?). Obviously no one thinks changing someone's beliefs in one roll, even for a single encounter, is appropriate.
Also a secondary issue here is actually tracking this down; there are immediate short-term effects - maybe your character made mine chuckle - and long-term ones.
So a scenario: You are on an IC campaign to make my character vote in your House's favor. We meet for the first time ever, so both of our influences' 'scores' are neutral.
My take on this: When a player starts working on a goal communication is systematized; there's no sneaking things in on the OOC level. It's all clear, right on the table. So you'd start by typing something like "+influence arkandel=Vote in surreality's House's favor" which I see immediately as a message and in my sheet. At this point I can assign it a difficulty factor - which you don't get to see, so you might end up overcompensating for a project that's easy... but that's part of the fun.
So at this point there are two 'scores'; our PCs' personal relationship, and the goal your character is working on. The better your score on the former, the more you can move the needle on the latter.
Then by limiting the frequency such rolls can take place (it could be one a day, or one per scene) there's a timeline... further compounded by the fact you might need additional social attributes (Empathy versus Subterfuge?) to see how far along you are or how well it's going so far.
I really like this because not only does it not open doors for creeps, it actually closes them; they can't spring "panther penis" on anyone out of the blue - it needs to be a goal, OOC stated right from the start. Nor can anyone insist they changed a character's views overnight since, by definition, long-term goals take a longer time and their player gets to pick the difficulty of the task.
Thoughts?
No one else here has a growing document of usable quotes for future character inspiration and wiki pages? I know it ain't so.
@faraday said in Social Systems:
My characters have been conned. They've been used. They've been seduced. They've been manipulated. They've been cowed into submission. I am not in any way, shape or form against the idea of someone else 'winning', nor am I against bad things happening to my character. I just want to have a say in whether it makes sense for it to happen, and not leave such decisions up to the whims of a crappy (in most RPGs anyway) dice mechanic.
As a disclaimer please let me know if I'm over-arguing with you because while I find this debate interesting, I realize it can also get annoying.
Having said that, what makes sense is a matter of narrative and we're all fallible when it comes to how we interpret what we're doing. So in a in a traditional 'physical' stated system it might make perfect sense for my combatant's personal journey at that point to result in victory... only I keep rolling 1's, and he continues to fall on his face despite the odds. Hell, what about those unexpected triumphs? Sure, my guy is a bookish nerd, but he just broke a baseball bat over the villain's head and knocked him the fuck out because I rolled out of this world - woohoo!
That's arguably one of the advantages of having stats - that no matter what circumstance and accidents still play a role in the IC world and things remain exciting in the OOC realm as well; if I, as a player, know beyond any shadow of doubt my guy will fare well (or even that he won't) then it takes some of the thrill and anticipation from the outcome.
Either way the power level should only matter for the usual two reasons:
Dick-waving contests
One character taking over plots since they can do everything themselves while others twiddle their thumbs.
But otherwise not all X-Men ought to be at the same power level - that's in fact one of their thematic points; mutations are random. One person can be hideously misshapen but get no real usable perks while another gets to be a muscle-bound invulnerable person who can function perfectly well in real life.
@auspice said in Favourite Quote (Inspirational or Otherwise):
@arkandel said in Favourite Quote (Inspirational or Otherwise):
No one else here has a growing document of usable quotes for future character inspiration and wiki pages? I know it ain't so.
I just hit up https://www.brainyquote.com/, tap a few topics relevant to the character, grab a dozen or so quotes, shuffle through them to find the ones that feel right and steadily drill down until I get the ones I want.
If I tried to keep a document it'd be too massive and unwieldy.
I keep the best of what I ran across books, web pages or even lyrics because sooner or later they will come in handy. I'd say I have about 30-40 of those, some more readily usable than others.
@ghost said in Social Systems:
We should be adults, and it is a game.
Sure, but this discussion is about systems, and you can't systematize maturity.
@Eerie said:
Xbox is up this morning, followed by EA!
My husband already pre-ordered the Pip Boy thing and I quietly roll my eyes. It will still be better than the FPS game that came with creepy night vision goggles and led to him stalking me through the house in the dark. I was secretly glad when they were stolen off his desk at work.
"secretly"
"stolen off"
"at work"
None of these words mean what @Eerie professes.
@ghost said in Social Systems:
I won't get on my soapbox about how this I think has become the norm more than not and why so many Mushers care about which player is playing which bit...
About that bit... the easy answer is to not play with (or limit interactions with) people you don't like. It's pretty intuitive too - we do it in every other game, both online and iRL, so why not MU*?
Now if I know you hate my guts and I keep showing up to throw dice (or even just poses) at you then I'm an asshole, and that's not a problem systems can solve. But it's not a problem per se - I'm totally fine with people caring who's playing whom - and it only becomes one when circumstances or policies try to force them to continue interacting on any meaningful level.
@ixokai Fair enough. And without knowing what The 100's cookies are, I kinda get the vibe it's one of those systems I always thought typically turned out to be massive circle jerks.
About applications and MG specifically, I think it could be useful to staff not to see if a player is "good enough for a character but rather to ensure they can roleplay their way out of a paper bag. Some iffy players can be avoided, yet I imagine if Magneto or someone others should be gravitating around is a terrible player then it can have an impact on the MU* as a whole.
I just want Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. to get renewed.
The last season and the first half of this one were really good.
Basically the average for the entire run other than the first half of the first season is pretty high, yet most people stopped watching right at that point. After Winter Soldier that show really took off.
@auspice said in Encouraging Proactive Players:
Why is it so much to hope that people might actually take some initiative and go 'page storyteller=Hey, you said to let you know what we'd like to follow up on. I'd like to have a scene where we go talk to that museum curator sometime.'
Because that's how people are. It's also why Storytellers need to stop asking people what they want ran; in my experience if players know what they want - which is rare - they'll let me know. Otherwise I give them what I have in mind, and it just works that way.
The way I handle it at least is that if I'm making a multi-part PrP I have the scenes planned in advance, but they're in a very vague state so they can stay flexible. So if it's a three-scene PrP about a new drug based on vitae, it might be structured like this:
Discovery (the PCs are approached by a concerned, shaken neonate who gives them some basic facts. This lets the group get together)
Action (the PCs go to the warehouse they were pointed at in the first scene. There are goons there, who they either walk into surrendering or fight with)
Climax (the PCs go visit the Ordo Dracul whose identity they discovered in the second scene as the mastermind behind all this. She either gets away, killed or is subdued and delivered to the Prince)
There are opportunities for proactive actions between scenes; they can go on fact finding campaigns about the warehouse or its staff between 1 and 2, or research the Elder by talking to some of her allies and enemies between 2 and 3, or whatever else.
Maybe if one of them figures out something whacky or brilliant then one of those scenes doesn't get to happen; perhaps one of the PCs secretly makes a deal with the Elder who gets away before the party gets there, and the scene becomes about raiding her laboratory and figuring out her ties to the Brood. Or maybe the party use their police connections to get the warehouses raided by cops ahead of time, and I need to come up with something else for them to do in the second PrP - there's always a possibility one of the scenes is invalidated by PC actions. That's fine!
But all things considered I want to have a 'next scene' in mind whether my players do stuff or don't. If they come up with their own plans that's awesome! If not, that's why I get paid the big bucks.
@enoch You may want want to put the game's address somewhere prominently on the wiki. 
I had to find it here.