That One Guy - Heckler At The Training Dojo

[JoshTheValiant]

I recently converted my months-old D&D game to the DFRPG (surprisingly easy to do, as long as you don't care about direct conversion and instead care about concepts), and one of the sample conflicts we ran involved our two main melee combatants sparring with each other to get a hold of how stress and defense and consequences work.

This worked great until our resident cantankerous Deva started trash talking.  Immediate question:  If Empathy determines social initiative, and Alertness handles physical initiative, what happens when someone in a physical conflict finds themselves forced to engage in a social conflict alongside it?  Should they check their initiative skill at the beginning of each exchange depending on which conflict they're invested in?  Or are there other ways the board has figured out to deal with the situation of mixed conflicts?

[Ghsdkgb]

I just let them do social attacks on their turn, mix it all into the same conflict. Running two conflicts simultaneously like that would just be overly confusing.

To determine turn order, just go with whatever type of conflict it started as. And if one's going to continue trying to talk while the other is using his fists, then do Empathy of the first guy vs. Alertness of the second.

[Haru]

In a situation like that, the trash talk could do one of two things, I think.

1)
It is simply there to aid the fight. Make your opponent nervous, etc. In that case, I don't see the need to switch things to social conflict measures.

2)
Switch the physical conflict to a social conflict. In that case any actual fighting that would remain would only be aiding the social conflict. It would be to humiliate the opponent, rather than hurt them.

[Ghsdkgb]

See, I'd always just played such that, even if you're in a physical fight, you can still make mental or social attacks, and if any one is taken out, he loses the fight. Either he surrenders to a point you made or his brain shuts down or something.

Maybe throw in some free Aspects that can be tagged in a situation, like adrenalin's flowing too hotly for words to have the same impact or something.

[Sanctaphrax]

See, I'd always just played such that, even if you're in a physical fight, you can still make mental or social attacks, and if any one is taken out, he loses the fight. Either he surrenders to a point you made or his brain shuts down or something.

Bad idea, in my opinion.

See, if I make a character with decent Athletics and Endurance and a Toughness power, then my character should be pretty tough to take down in a fight. I shouldn't need Discipline and Rapport and Conviction and Presence unless something weird is going on.

Plus, social attacks will generally be unreasonably effective against dedicated combatants. A character with a superb social attack skill could one-shot Sue the zombie dinosaur.

And if Sue went up against herself, she'd have more luck attacking with Intimidation than with Fists.

If you think that Sue should have some kind of immunity to social attacks despite not having any such thing written on her character sheet, then substitute something slightly smarter but just as strong for her.

More discussion here:

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,22660.0.html
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,27018.0.html

PS: What was the heckler saying that would qualify as a social attack? Most heckling would be a maneuver.

[Silverblaze]

Bad idea, in my opinion.

See, if I make a character with decent Athletics and Endurance and a Toughness power, then my character should be pretty tough to take down in a fight. I shouldn't need Discipline and Rapport and Conviction and Presence unless something weird is going on.

Plus, social attacks will generally be unreasonably effective against dedicated combatants. A character with a superb social attack skill could one-shot Sue the zombie dinosaur.

And if Sue went up against herself, she'd have more luck attacking with Intimidation than with Fists.

If you think that Sue should have some kind of immunity to social attacks despite not having any such thing written on her character sheet, then substitute something slightly smarter but just as strong for her.

More discussion here:

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,22660.0.html
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,27018.0.html

PS: What was the heckler saying that would qualify as a social attack? Most heckling would be a maneuver.

I actually agree 100%.

I'm pretty against a lot of things about social combat, which can be found in other threads.  I won't get into it here.

[Ghsdkgb]

A LOT of good points, there.

I think it should still be possible to talk someone into giving up even when the fists start flying, but it should be a LOT harder to do during combat than around a table.

I'll talk with my group and see what they want to do.

[Mr. Death]

Bad idea, in my opinion.

See, if I make a character with decent Athletics and Endurance and a Toughness power, then my character should be pretty tough to take down in a fight. I shouldn't need Discipline and Rapport and Conviction and Presence unless something weird is going on.

Plus, social attacks will generally be unreasonably effective against dedicated combatants. A character with a superb social attack skill could one-shot Sue the zombie dinosaur.

And if Sue went up against herself, she'd have more luck attacking with Intimidation than with Fists.

If you think that Sue should have some kind of immunity to social attacks despite not having any such thing written on her character sheet, then substitute something slightly smarter but just as strong for her.

More discussion here:

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,22660.0.html
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,27018.0.html

PS: What was the heckler saying that would qualify as a social attack? Most heckling would be a maneuver.

Yeah, social stuff in a physical combat situation I'd just treat as maneuvers alone. And even if you did treat them as attacks, as the gamebooks say, being taken out socially doesn't mean you're taken out Physically, and vice verse. Quite the opposite, in fact: I'd imagine more than a few physical conflicts start because someone just lost a social conflict.

That said, any kind of, "No, you can't talk the zombie down" stuff I'd treat as Compels or GM fiat because, well, it doesn't make sense that you could intimidate a giant zombie dinosaur.

[devonapple]

In Dogs in the Vineyard, for instance, the escalation level of a given conflict determines the intensity of the Fallout (aka Consequences), as well as how competent a character is with that type of conflict.

Players have four ability scores (Acuity, Heart, Body, and Will) which determine dice pools, and four levels of escalation (talking, physical, fisticuffs, and gunfighting). Each of those levels of escalation uses two of those ability scores. When the conflict escalates, you bring in any new dice you have left for that level of conflict. So if you go from talking, to pushing, to fighting, to guns, you will have eventually blown through your dice for all four of your ability scores. And if you had any bad turns (took Fallout), the Fallout will range from smaller dice to much larger dice, and the larger the dice, the more likely it is you will have been injured or killed in a fight (gunfighting, as you can imagine, is a surefire - ha ha - way to get death results).

So the level of escalation is self-policing: you're only bringing in the ability scores appropriate to that level of escalation, and any lasting damage you take is going to be appropriate to that type of conflict. The gunfighter who isn't very socially adept is going to fare poorly in a battle of words. The diplomat shouldn't pull out a gun first thing in a conflict. But in an important conflict, all characters will likely have burned through all of their dice, and escalated through all levels of conflict, so it kinda evens out, and the only difference is how the dice fell and how tactically people used their abilities.

I explained all that to explain this: in DFRPG, the Consequences are basically the same. They may differ slightly in how they can be worked off, but they all take up the same battery of Consequence slots, and a person who has been hit hard by a Social Conflict is going to be less equipped to take Consequences in a physical confrontation. It's how the game works, and it's kind of how the fiction works. Stunts or high skills may give someone *more* slots for a particular type of Consequence.

So it becomes vital to establish *what* a given conflict is, and parse all attacks/maneuvers/etc. in ways which pertain to that conflict.

[Mr. Death]

Honestly, it's always made very little sense to me that someone would be that much closer to losing a fist fight because of a Severe social consequence, which is part of the reason my group doesn't do much straight up Social conflicts, and when they have happened, they're fairly low-level affairs.

[JoshTheValiant]

Lots of good points here, thanks to everyone who's weighed in.  I hadn't considered the "talking out the colossus" angle before, since I haven't ever really thrown my players against anything mind numbingly beastly (except that one time with the dragon, and even that wasn't so bad), but that alone is a huge thing for me to consider for the future.  I think I'll stick with the escalation model that was referenced...  and go investigate Dogs In The Vineyard for plunder potential.  It seems like an interesting abstraction system.

Re: Social Consequences messing up a Physical Conflict, I think that's a matter of interpretation.  If your Mild Social Consequence looks like "Butt Of A Really Good Joke", then yeah, I can't imagine that interfering much with a fight afterward.  If, on the other hand, it looks like "Stomach-Clenching Embarassment", it seems more likely to mess with the focus of the fighter in a much more negative way.  I think it's mostly a matter of interpretation more than a problem with the system.

On the other hand, I can definitely see lobbying for reversing the order of Stress and Consequences, or even going pure Consequence, which every type of conflict having its own list, nothing shared.  Frankly, I like that idea better, but I've always been a fan of individual injury tracking.  (I'm a recovering GURPS player, simulation is in my blood.  I'm still regularly tempted to regulate Aspects into static effects in a Stunt-like fashion)

[Mr. Death]

Re: Social Consequences messing up a Physical Conflict, I think that's a matter of interpretation.  If your Mild Social Consequence looks like "Butt Of A Really Good Joke", then yeah, I can't imagine that interfering much with a fight afterward.  If, on the other hand, it looks like "Stomach-Clenching Embarassment", it seems more likely to mess with the focus of the fighter in a much more negative way.  I think it's mostly a matter of interpretation more than a problem with the system.

On the other hand, I can definitely see lobbying for reversing the order of Stress and Consequences, or even going pure Consequence, which every type of conflict having its own list, nothing shared.  Frankly, I like that idea better, but I've always been a fan of individual injury tracking.  (I'm a recovering GURPS player, simulation is in my blood.  I'm still regularly tempted to regulate Aspects into static effects in a Stunt-like fashion)

Honestly, that's how I thought it was originally, because with them all shared, it leads to things like, "Okay, I got shot and Taken Out because...I took a Severe Consequence when I terminally embarrassed myself in front of my family at a party six months ago? What?"

The whole Social conflict/stress/consequences thing just seems so far removed from Physical or Mental conflicts that, to me at least, it doesn't make any sense that they should be on the same spectrum and affect one another like that. The book says it doesn't really make sense for someone to die of embarrassment, but in a real, rules-wise sense, it's entirely possible to get your ass kicked because of totally unrelated social stuff.

[Sanctaphrax]

I wrote a power called Mindless for creatures like Sue. Planning to expand it to cover animal intelligence. It provides more-or-less complete immunity to social and mental attacks. I suggest you check it out.

/shameless self-promotion.

Consequences are an Out-Of-Game thing. Being easier to punch out because of your Severe Social Consequence is like being easier to punch out because you spent all your FP in a social conflict.

This is the only interpretation that makes sense. There are plenty of physical consequences that shouldn't really affect your combat capabilities either.

If you eliminate stress tracks and just use consequences, you should probably remove the ability to tag consequences. Otherwise the death spiral is too prevalent.

[sinker]

Honestly, it's always made very little sense to me that someone would be that much closer to losing a fist fight because of a Severe social consequence, which is part of the reason my group doesn't do much straight up Social conflicts, and when they have happened, they're fairly low-level affairs.

You really have to consider two things. Firstly you have to consider that someone's consequences are representative of their greater health. When you are depressed you are much less likely to put greater effort into anything, much more likely to give up with little resistance. Even doctors these days are realizing that your physical health is not the only part of your health, and that problems in your greater health can lead to problems in your physical health.

And secondly you have to think about what severe social consequences are. I can totally see "My girlfriend dumped me" influencing someone's ability to do anything. Or perhaps "Friendless". Remember that severe consequences are supposed to be severe. Lesser consequences may still influence physical conflict, but of course they will do so in a lesser fashion and are less likely to given the recovery time.

As for social conflict within physical, some of it is just impractical. Do you realize that some social actions take upwards of 10 minutes to a half an hour to complete? You could have several physical conflicts in that time.

[Mr. Death]

Consequences are an Out-Of-Game thing. Being easier to punch out because of your Severe Social Consequence is like being easier to punch out because you spent all your FP in a social conflict.

This is the only interpretation that makes sense. There are plenty of physical consequences that shouldn't really affect your combat capabilities either.

If you eliminate stress tracks and just use consequences, you should probably remove the ability to tag consequences. Otherwise the death spiral is too prevalent.

Yes, I understand all that. I'm just saying it twigs on my sense of cause and effect. Even if a physical consequence doesn't affect your ability to fight, it still makes sense that you can only rack up so many injuries before it's too much. Or that your Mental consequences mean you're not on the ball enough to focus.

It makes less sense to me that you could fill up your consequence slots from getting reamed in a social conflict, and then in the next scene the badass warrior/wizard/whatever you're playing gets taken down from one shot despite being physically and mentally perfectly fine.

You really have to consider two things. Firstly you have to consider that someone's consequences are representative of their greater health. When you are depressed you are much less likely to put greater effort into anything, much more likely to give up with little resistance. Even doctors these days are realizing that your physical health is not the only part of your health, and that problems in your greater health can lead to problems in your physical health.

And secondly you have to think about what severe social consequences are. I can totally see "My girlfriend dumped me" influencing someone's ability to do anything. Or perhaps "Friendless". Remember that severe consequences are supposed to be severe. Lesser consequences may still influence physical conflict, but of course they will do so in a lesser fashion and are less likely to given the recovery time.

See, I see things like being Depressed as mental consequences more than social. Social seems, from the RAW, to be things about your image to others--it mentions that "healing" them tends to be by doing things like community service, changing the perception that others have of you, rather than internal.

But like I said, it's just my personal thing, I'm not arguing that the rules should be changed, just saying it doesn't make a whole ton of sense to me.