| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
A Roleplaying game of perilous adventure!
| Page 2 of 2 (18 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
Yepesnopes said:
I think that having social action cards and deciding how many rolls (influence results) you need to resolve a social encounter are detached things.
Typically when I set a social encounter I decide beforehand how hard to "win" it will be, i.e. how many "influence" results will be needed. I do this typically with a counter, or progress tracker (call it as you want). I also try to decide how the NPC(s) react to the different "social" skills (guile, charm, leadership…). What I was trying to bring to disucssion is if social action cards are really worth the xp cost. At the end of the day, a PC can use role play plus an apropriate skill roll (perform a stunt if you want to call it like this) to try to influence a NPC.
I had a thought about this recently. I think it's important to decide not just how many influence results you need, but why. So like you need first to get the barkeep to even talk to a small band of heavily armed psychopaths. Then you might need to convince him you're not actually sent by Ziggy. Then you have to convince him that the information you're looking for won't come back to bite him in the ass. Finally you have show him how it would benefit him.
Okay, that might be way too many influences, but the idea is that by giving context to each of them it will inform which cards could work and what happens if any given one fails.
As for letting characters act without a card… my general rule of thumb is I'm much more forgiving of when and how and against who you can influence when you're using a card instead of just a skill check. It's not perfect, but…
With Signature
RARodger said:
As for letting characters act without a card… my general rule of thumb is I'm much more forgiving of when and how and against who you can influence when you're using a card instead of just a skill check. It's not perfect, but…
It is an option, it just feels wierd to me to penalize a player's idea because his PC does not have an action card.
I feel ok without using action cards, there are no action cards for example for perception rolls (follow trails, awaraness…), or for lockpicking, or for climbing a wall…
Warhammer 3 is a game where action cards have been heavily focused on combat. In that aspect it is like D&D 4 but with action cards instead of lists of especial habilities. It looks like that they wanted to do something similar for social encounters, but they fell short and only achieved it in a…30%?
Cheers,
Yepes
The Book of the Asur: a High Elves fan supplement for WFRP 3rd ed.
Secrets of the Anvil: a Runecrafting fan supplement for WFRP 3rd ed.
Libro Monstra: A fan made creature guide
Denizens of the Old World: A fan made resurce of NPCs
The Dark Side: a fan supplement for Witches, Warlocks & Magisters in WFRP 3rd ed.
Yepesnopes said:
Warhammer 3 is a game where action cards have been heavily focused on combat. In that aspect it is like D&D 4 but with action cards instead of lists of especial habilities. It looks like that they wanted to do something similar for social encounters, but they fell short and only achieved it in a…30%?
Cheers,
Yepes
Well, I agree with that. I guess what I mean by 'more forgiving' is that action cards should be for doing stuff you just shouldn't be able to do. Like charming people who hate you or something or talking yourself out of getting caught red-handed. That's more what I mean by 'more forgiving.'
With Signature
| Page 2 of 2 (18 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS