I am working on my rpg. I have a combat system that I will post later - it is a very stripped down version of 4e that lets you build your own abilities using a point system.
Now I am working on a social system. The social system is separate from the combat system and is posted here as a standalone system. The intro is below which explains its goals, link to the rules at the bottom.
I am looking for feedback. It has limited playtesting but not of all of the options. I want a balance of characters feel distinct but easy to create/play, the NPC's feel distinct, and play feels more like just roleplaying rather than a straight mechanical challenge. ---
These rules provided simple mechanics for PC's attempting to influence NPC's through conversation. This allows social interactions to take their place beside combat as events that can have significant effects on the story. These rules allow the PC's to attempt to solve their problems by talking and determining if they can based on their abilities and the difficulty of what they are attempting. The social interactions should flow naturally rather than feeling like a game. They should be actively roleplayed with each player and the GM speaking for their character, and the GM describing the results in realistic terms in addition to noting the mechanical effects.
In social engagements, the PC's attempt to influence the target while maintaining sufficient interest to continue the conversation. PC can have flavors of interaction, and they do best when matching the right flavor to the target (rogues talking to criminals, priests talking to the religious, etc.). Additionally, the target has topics for the PC's to mention or avoid to their benefit or peril.
In order to keep all players interested social interactions, these rules assume that all PC's can be equally useful in social engagements, but not necessarily in all social engagements. Flavors allow PC's to be the best at interacting with a particular group of NPC's. (I.E. Instead of the barbarian being bad at talking, they may be only good at talking to other barbarians and warriors.) Or the PC's can specialize in different roles within a conversation (I.E. a profiler and good cop/bad cop).
http://www.4shared.com/office/MoYpv-Uu/Standalone_Social.html
Quick note: the page that appears when you click the link is off-putting, but all you have to do is (1) click the blue "download now" button, (2) wait for the 20 second countdown, (3) click the "download file now" text link.
I checked this out and I absolutely love the intent and all the factors you're incorporating. I am having trouble envisioning how it plays, though. I can't tell how much the process of tracking and employing the relevant mechanical quantities will distract from the "roleplay it out" experience. Is there any way you could provide a transcript or recording of an example social challenge, so I can see what the players and GM do moment to moment?
Quote from: dugfromthearth on February 11, 2012, 03:56:15 AM
In order to keep all players interested social interactions, these rules assume that all PC's can be equally useful in social engagements, but not necessarily in all social engagements. Flavors allow PC's to be the best at interacting with a particular group of NPC's. (I.E. Instead of the barbarian being bad at talking, they may be only good at talking to other barbarians and warriors.) Or the PC's can specialize in different roles within a conversation (I.E. a profiler and good cop/bad cop).
http://www.4shared.com/office/MoYpv-Uu/Standalone_Social.html
This bolded part is gold!! GOLD I TELL YOU!!!!!
I just had to say that before reading the document. You have flicked a huge 'dOH!' switch in my head that is going to bear fruit.
Back when Ive finished reading....
... I too think you have some great ideas buried in there, but with social systems I reckon less is more, and I think you have too much in there.
Rules for how much a distracting environment does and so on. Too much.
Defiantely got something there though. Id start cutting.