The Dresden Files > DFRPG

Social Combat Armor and Weapons

<< < (2/3) > >>

Sanctaphrax:
It's an interesting idea. Worth testing, at least.

It's a bit odd that the baseline is weapon 2 and armour 2. Might be worth rejiggering to make 0 the baseline.

Also, it might be too easy to talk people into deeply terrible deals if the only difference between a decent deal and a terrible one is 2 shifts.

narphoenix:

--- Quote from: Sanctaphrax on July 13, 2019, 04:44:46 AM ---It's an interesting idea. Worth testing, at least.

It's a bit odd that the baseline is weapon 2 and armour 2. Might be worth rejiggering to make 0 the baseline.

Also, it might be too easy to talk people into deeply terrible deals if the only difference between a decent deal and a terrible one is 2 shifts.

--- End quote ---

Excellent. The patented Sanctaphrax seal of approval (at least tentatively)

That said, the thing is that these two goals are mutually incompatible, at least if you want to avoid overcomplicating the situation. FATE doesn’t allow negative weapon or armor ratings. You could allow something fancy, but that would overcomplicate things a bit. Funnily enough, despite the weirdness of the default armor value being 2, it actually helps: it makes it harder to accept deals that are disfavorable from people who you aren’t close to without more maneuvers (and if someone you thought you were friends with offers something actually objectionable, your armor value could end up going up: think of Gandalf’s response when his buddy Saruman offered that they work with Sauron. This sort of thing would have be monitored a bit by the GM to make sure it’s reasonable, but it’s not unreasonable to have). And if a deal is objectionable enough, social combat can devolve quickly into less civilized physical combat: try to convince Mab to undertake a horrible deal, and her skills are high enough that even after a maneuver or two, she can be expected to defend without consequences, then decide that you have insulted her with this offer and then take steps to resolve her Displeasure more directly.

Sanctaphrax:
There's no reason DFRPG can't have negative weapon / armour ratings. It never has, but they would work fine.

You could also change weapon and armour from deal and relationship to favourable and unfavourable conditions in general, but I'd prefer negative ratings.

Silverblaze:
I kind of feel like the negative version of weapon 4: ( destruction of all you hold dear) should be a separate intimidate roll, a maneuver, or something else.  Also if a character is automatically believed to be able to do this...perhaps roleplaying without need for social combat is likely best.  Or when dealing with someone like Mab or other plot devices rolls are not needed...they have 8-12 + in skills and a weapon rating serves no purpose.

I assumed that is what maneuvers were for in social combat anyhow. 

OTOH I see no reason these can't exist... they just need tweaking.  And of course testing.

Taran:
How will it deal with these situations:

1. A social conflict designed to ruin or bolster a reputation.  Ie: it has nothing to do with a deal.

2. The deception skill whose use is designed to make ‘disadvantageous’ requests seem advantageous.  It seems the whole point of deception is to circumvent high armour ratings and make high weapon values seem innocuous.

3.  Intimidation seems to have the opposite problem.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page