Posts made by Lithium

@faraday The whole thing about playing by the rules, is everyone keeps throwing around WoD as the standard by which people are discussing social rolls. Yes different games have different rules. Yes if it was a pure consent game then the /rules/ of that game would be to have complete player agency.

Obviously (to me at least) I am not talking about /those/ games.

In those games, the rules are such that player agency is first and foremost, but, people keep trying to apply player agency to games with rules that do not support complete player agency, and then people get angry, when others who /are/ playing by the rules of that game, are saying they aren't.

Because they're not.

I have not said that dice rolls make anything possible, because that is false. Dice rolls make anything /within the scope of the rules for that system/ possible. That is the disconnect here, there are games with social rules, that make things possible, and people want to just go 'No. Cuz it interferes with my Player Agency.'

Also, I have no idea why you think these aren't games. They use rule systems. They aren't reality. They aren't us. They are fictional characters.

Now a point could be made for say, a talker situation, that it's not a game, it's just collaborative writing and make believe, but if there is a game system, then it's a game.

Firearms is a bad example to use here, because not knowing to lead? That's called rolling badly because you're not using that many dice.

Situational modifiers are something that are supposed to be given by the ST not by the players, the PC's can pitch something, and the ST can go yeah ok, or nope, not gonna fly. In the same vein, if there is no ST, if a player pitches a situational modifier, other players have the ability to go: Nope, not gonna fly in this situation.

Now I also agree a specialty is a specialty and you should only get one since... it's a specialty. Once you start overlapping them you're not specializing, you're now diversifying so that defeats the point of a specialty.

But I also agree, this shouldn't be in the mildly constructive area either.

I would say that would depend on the personality of the demon. Why can't we have both?

@faraday @The-Sands

Sorry. I snapped. I'd been up a long time and needed sleep and was just frustrated.

Why because I don't see eye to eye on this. I probably never will. There is no happy middle ground for me.

The whole idea of player agency is something I don't understand.

The whole point of an RPG for me, is to not be in control of everything, it is to play out a life different from my own. I don't want to rail road a character, I want to give the character a starting point and then let them go and be free to experience /their/ lives.

We're not writing a book here. We really aren't. We're playing a game in a medium that involves writing, not writing a book and using dice to determine the outcome.

/NOBODY/ on this planet is one hundred percent consistent, one hundred percent of the time. Hell not even software.

That is my problem with this whole 'Player Agency' bit.

Also, no, I am not asking for social rolls to be like bullets, and I am /tired/ of that bullshit that the 'player agency' people are putting forth.

I just want social characters to be able to influence people socially, because, that's the point.

I just want everyone to play by the same fucking rules and quit trying to cheat.

(ETA) Now if a game wanted to give social stats a price break, both in chargen and in xp, and say they only functioned as guidelines against PC's but functioned fully against NPC's I'd be fine with that. Because that's playing by the rules of that game. I'm a coder, I like rules being followed. Without rules we have Anarchy.

@the-sands Oh for fucks sake, here goes the circular nonsense again. Several systems have been pointed out as having /something/ similar to that, and everyone says 'aspects suck' and then there are people who are demanding a characters whole entire personality and mindset be mapped out on the game, on a sheet, so that they can point and go: No. I am immune to your stuff that you paid points for even though it cost more than all my combined punch you in the face skills.

There comes a point wher epeople HAVE to be able to separate their 'player agency' from the god forsaken character and let the character /live/ in a virtual world that is not this world, where they can change and adapt and have foibles, successes, failures, and not all be bound by some ineffable way some nebulous person see's the character.

There is NO SYSTEM that accurately represents reality!

Not one!

Quit trying to make social combat like /reality/ and play by the rules.

People who die on the 'Player Agency' hill will not be happy with any sort of social combat system.

That's not to say anyone here is doing that, but there comes a point when: You are playing a game, the game is going to take you out of your comfort zone eventually (Sooner in some game systems), and if it's so far out of your comfort zone, that you have to try and make rules not apply then... maybe it's you, not the system.

(Note: The you is a general nebulous you, not directed at anyone specific)

The way you avoid min-maxing isn't systemic, it's thematic. If the goal is to be as powerful as possible, there will be min maxing, as we see a lot in WoD/CoD, D&D, where optimization can equate to survival in an antagonistic setting.

If the setting and theme is such that there is less of a pvp element, then min-maxing becomes less of a problem.

For example: Dark Metal, to not min-max there would mean setting yourself up to die back in it's hay day. The very nature of sphere's make it so you have conflict within your own sphere, conflict with other sphere's and the majority of that conflict is other PC's, who can and will optimize as well.

In D&D optimization is fun cuz it makes you feel powerful, but, it's not entirely necessary because for the most part, the antagonism is all NPC's.

So from a game design standpoint... you end up needing to design either a setting that doesn't encourage it or limits it's impact, or you need to create a system where people can, as was said before, make what they /want/ to play, without having to sacrifice in order to do so.

NECRO:

My go to is every time combat is entered, there should be the possibility of real bad juju happening.

That applies to every type of character though, not just mortals.

Mortal horror to me should be horrific, and without that fear of character death or other drastic consequence, there is no fear, there is no horror.

@thenomain Easy to understand rules for conflict resolution, or at least something that people can point at and go: Rules say this.

And the Rule is the Rule.

A system where the player character isn't designed to be the protagonist, but just another cog in the machine.

In some ways I think it is like the whole KISS principle: Keep It Simple Sweetie.

Or the other side of the coin: A system where everyone /can/ be the hero.

I just have to say, again:

FATE social combat:

Full agency to how it ends (99% of the time). AKA: Yes you rolled crazy high seduction, but, rather than sleep with you my character instead removes themselves from that social interaction because they are embarrassed. Or something similar.

Social health tracks. Social stats determine social health track. The social health track also has lasting effects if you let it get that far, which is how brainwashing works.

Aspects which may be called on to either defend, or harm, if you figure them out. Social aspects that can give you bonus points, or reduce bonuses for others.

Yes, there is social PvP (I've lost social pvp on several occasions, not once was my character forced to do anything out of character, because I had agency) but it is not one roll, it takes time, and it is in a way /far/ more powerful than combat skills... because they are social acceptable. Pulling out a sword or gun or just punching someone's face in? Generally not.

Still not sure why FATE gets so much hate honestly.

Now it's a race. Now I have to finish my big trouble game.

Zobi will be pleased.

@three-eyed-crow hits the nail on the head here, there are a /ton/ of games, that are not WoD that are quite happily spinning along.

It's just most people get all their 'numbers' from Mudstats. Which is not all inclusive.

A system that allows for the players to engage in the theme, without a GM/DM/ST present.

That is the absolute /one/ hard rule.

However, most systems can do this, if the theme and setting is written in a way that can handle it.

Personally, the one thing the system must have is actually a /not/.

A system must not be map based. If it is map based it adds a whole other level of difficulty to trying to learn the game, or do anything beyond roleplay.

Take for example, Warhammer 40K. Sure you could try and convert it to an RPG (They have, as a matter of fact) but if you tried to whole sale recreate Warhammer 40K, just trying to manage the armies would be horrific.

So, for example, say 5th edition D&D. Great system, I love playing it, but it is tied heavily into the map, which means you need the map in order to control positioning of the monsters and the players /or/ you need players who are cool with just being 'told' numbers and running with it while the DM keeps track personally.

As for else is required...

Depends on how much automation you want to do honestly. Almost any TT RPG can be turned into a MU if you automate it enough. Even something like Dragon Quest.

What @Thenomain says here is key:

Player Buy In, /and/ accountability is important.

Nobody has said that social skills should change core concepts of your character with just a single dice roll.

Nobody has.

Except the people who are advocating against Social Combat. The ones who try to strawman the conversation by saying that because someone has so much dice they should be able to break the rules.

No.

The rules state that social combat happens thusly, and so thus must follow.

Nobody has said that people have to RP typesex.

But people /do/ get seduced ALL THE TIME and end up sleeping with people they probably regret doing so, because either they're out of the moment, or they realize they've just shot the pooch when it comes to their current relationship.

By choosing to play a system, people should abide by that system, or any house rules made to that system.

It doesn't matter if I think someone is laughably silly, because /I/ am not my character. Nobody is. We barely remember our own lives let along someone else's.

By saying that your 'player agency' is more important than the rules, you are saying you are not a team player and unwilling to abide by those rules.

If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. Same applies to rulesets.

In most any game system I can think of social combat isn't a roll of one and done, you've got to wear their willpower down, you've got to use tools and tricks and manipulations. Even in oWoD you had to make them burn through all their willpower iirc.

Nothing is stopping you from taking your character out of the situation, but if you /choose/ to remain in it, abide by the rules in place. RP out the consequences, let the character grow in response to their environment and actions rather than dictating a completely one sided story due to 'Player Agency'.

Everyone's fun is equal.

@bobotron I think it's the fact that people don't really care about how someone poses a punch, and then rolls dice, to get the effect, but people seem to care /fucking mightily/ about how a social thing is posed and how it conveys to dice.

So in essence, Dice are Dice, they convey what the pose cannot, so why is there such resistance to social dice?

@auspice That's fair I suppose, I do all my line art digitally too.

@auspice I can't imagine inking not being a thing anymore. So many artists are fucking /sloppy/ with their pencils...

@ganymede I was not responding to you. I was responding to @The-Sands viewpoint, I am starting to lean more in @Thenomain 's direction at this point.

Sorry if I was confusing you with this, I thought my tacit agreement with what you were saying was pretty obvious @Ganymede

If a characters social stats cost the same as physical stats and mental stats, and if physical/mental combat is mandatory, then social combat should also be mandatory.

If the system isn't to your liking, change the system, use a different one, but completely invalidating a huge chunk of character concept?

That's just shitty.

It's not even /hard/ to make your character be resistant to social combat, if you can step away from MurderEverything101 build.