I'm curious if anyone has used initiative and/or combat moves for "verbal jousting" -- arguments, debates,...
I'm curious if anyone has used initiative and/or combat moves for "verbal jousting" -- arguments, debates, bargaining, diplomacy, politics, etc? I realize the Relationship moves are intended for non-combat interactions, but I can really see initiative and some of the combat moves easily tweaked and applied to a match of wits and words.
Not an ironsworn player, but I remember seeing mechanics for social interactions, repartee etc in the game Lace and Steel. If you can find that you may get some good hints for adapting Ironsworn mechanics...
ReplyDeleteThanks for the tip, Alistair Langsford ! I see this game also involves Tarot cards, so I'm doubly intrigued.
ReplyDeleteThere was an MMORPG called Vanguard: Saga of Heroes that had a really unique aspect of play called Diplomacy. It was independent of adventuring and crafting "spheres" and one could advance and gain power (level up) solely as a diplomat without ever raising a sword at a hapless monster. It was presented as a card game within the RPG, but I could see something similar meshing with Ironsworn/PbtA via moves.
ReplyDeleteso the RaW don't technically include it as an option but I don't see any reason why one couldn't Strike or Clash with +heart, +wits, or +shadow (for impassioned debate, reparte, and lies respectively). Secure an Advantage and Face Danger also have a place there, and you could assign your opponent a rank just like you would a more conventional combat. I like it!
ReplyDeleteI could see some new Paths to go along this vein, too: Diplomat, Emissary, Arbitrator... something along those lines.
ReplyDeleteWhat brought this about (and there's a thread on Lone Wolf about this): I was using Tarot cards to generate a conflict and a character/backstory. And what I wound up with is a very Game-of-Thrones-like opposition of two Kingdoms in a sort of "cold war" over control of a major trade route. My character is something of a diplomat or official in one of the Kingdoms, playing a crucial role in the conflict -- and what came to mind is, of course, something akin to Varys the Spider (or even Tyrion Lannister) who does battle with words and subterfuge as intensely (and perhaps with greater repercussions) as any swordfight.
Spencer Salyer sorry for the intrusion. Classic British alternative comedy sketch about verbal combat training.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/JnPfgX82GmM
Paul Drury Was that Dawn French in the video, as well? Alexie was awesome, loved his character in The Young Ones! Thanks for the flashback!
ReplyDeleteYou know, between Paul Drury's comedy sketch post and thinking about Spencer Salyer's 'verbal jousting' ideas, I have an urge to try to pull off a "Black Adder"-ish low-fantasy comedy game... could get ugly! :D
ReplyDeleteGood one, Paul Drury . This is exactly what I had envisioned. :-)
ReplyDeleteSpencer Salyer, I used almost exactly what you described. Social combat to persuade a thane during a trial. As I recall it was as Justin Gordon suggested using Strike and Clash with Heart, Wits, or Shadow. Though personally, I've found Scene Challenges also work really well for this and add an extra tension with a countdown clock.
ReplyDeleteJeremiah Wenneker good deal! I need to revisit the Scene Challenges section in the book, I've not given those a try yet.
ReplyDeleteI really like this idea. This has some wonderful symmetry with combat moves. In fact, I submit that the “Compel” move becomes the discursive equivalent of “Battle”. But I also find myself thinking that for this to really shine, an additional track and suffer move is needed, one which reflects influence, prestige, honor or standing. I would distinguish this from “Spirit”, which I contend reflects a sense of self-worth, where as this would reflect how others perceive one’s hero.
ReplyDeleteBill Andel I would agree with that, though I think it depends on the kind of game you want. For example, Game of Thrones or a Samurai game would really benefit from an influence track or something similar
ReplyDeleteIt might be worth mentioning that Kiyomi McFarlane put together a track system for courtship with an Austenesque feel. If you take courtship at its base to be persuading someone, then it probably has some traction on this subject. Admittedly, the intention was a longer form of persuasion, the timescale is just a matter of scene framing. It might serve better for extended negotiations (forming an alliance or a trade deal) than it would for social-combat, but it seems worth mentioning.
ReplyDeleteIn Vanguard's diplomacy game, you would have a number of "dialogue" points for each encounter (which they called a "parley"), depending on difficulty. The first to zero would win the parley. A bit inverse, but not unlike an Ironsworn Progress Track, as I think someone suggested earlier.
ReplyDeleteI imagine as your character rises in power and increases their circle of influence (that might not be a bad term for it), that ought to be measured and rewarded in some way, but I would have to think on whether something more "persistent" could be useful outside (or in place) of the existing tracks.
I would love some social combat mechanics for Ironsworn! Someone please develop some Social Moves so I can play the urban/intrigue game I want. I suspect there's a lot to be gleaned from Burning Wheel's Circles, Relationships, Reputations, and Duel of Wits mechanics.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting exchange of ideas. Goblins Henchman and I have pondered social relations and this recent post from Geek Gamers also relates https://youtu.be/wpFU5qwLufI
ReplyDeleteyoutube.com - Social Combat in RPGs
Thredith Undomiel also has some good ideas. :)
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeletePaul Drury - I’ve added some comments on the YouTube video that might interest you ...
ReplyDeleteI think a comment on that Geek Gamers video lead me to check out the Song of Ice and Fire quickstart by Green Ronin (free PDF from the publisher). Starting on page 17, the Intrigue rules may be of interest. :-)
ReplyDeletefreeronin.com - freeronin.com/gr_files/SiF_Fastplay.pdf
Spencer Salyer thanks for the heads up. I will take a look. Have a great weekend.
ReplyDeleteGoblins Henchman if you have something you could copy across to G+ that may make it easier to track. :)
ReplyDeletePaul Drury - I made one comment and one reply (copied and pasted below):
ReplyDelete:: MY FIRST COMMENT ::
Is the 'Alignment 'modifier a 1 to 9 value (I presume so)?
:: Options for the Alignment value ::
If so, a system could be:
Good = 1
Neutral = 2
Evil = 3
Lawful = x 1
Neutral = x 2
Chaotic = x 3
So:
Chaotic evil = 3 x 3 = 9
Chaotic neutral = 2 x 3 = 6
Lawful good = 1 x 1
:: A alternative/simpler alignment system ::
Goods = 1 to 3; Neutrals 4 to 6; and Evils 7 to 9 (with the lawfuls being the lower of each series);
OR … if you think law & chaos are more dominant that good and evil, then:
Lawfuls = 1 to 3; Neutrals 4 to 6; and Chaotics 7 to 9 (with the Goods being the lower of each series)
:: Option for converting the D&D stat ::
If you divide the D&D stat by 2 (and round up) you get a range going from 2 to 9. If you round down instead you get a range going from 1 to 9. Might be easier than using a table.
:: GEEK GAMERS REPLY ::
Goblins Henchman Thanks for this comment. Really useful! I’ve been also wondering: how to assign intelligence values to standard d&d monsters on a relative scale because based on that you could start to map this system and interact socially (or try) with giants or ogres etc. (maybe...)
:: MY SECOND COMMENT ::
In AD&D the Monster Manual states:
The ratings correspond roughly to the following character intelligence scores:
0 Non-intelligent or not rateable
1 Animal intelligence
2-4 Semi-intelligent
5-7 Low intelligence
8-10 Average (human) intelligence
11-12 Very intelligent
13-14 Highly intelligent
15-16 Exceptionally intelligent
17-18 Genius
19-20 Supra-genius
21+ Godlike intelligence
So again, if you divide by 2 (and round up) you can scale to the Dallas system.
:: Conversion needed? ::
As an aside, since the Dallas system subtracts the opposing scores, do you need to convert to from a 3 to 18 system to a 1-9 system?
I need to think on this some more. Perhaps the alignment part falls apart … or the maths gets more/too tricky ???
:: Monster STR & CHA ::
For monsters, I think you have a problem of needing STR and CHA scores? I guess you could just assign a value you think is about right.
:: More on alignment ::
This is probably too complicated to implement, but I would have thought the more similar the alignment the more persuasive the person would be. So lawful good PCs are more persuasive to lawful good NPCs etc. So a perfect alignment match = 9 , the worse alignment match = 1
Edit - like this maybe:
Perfect spiritual alignment = 3
One step off = 2
Incompatible spiritual alignment = 1
Perfect legal alignment = x 3
One step off = x 2
Incompatible legal alignment = x 1
So a paladin (LG) trying to convince a NPC druid (NN): 2 x 2 = 4
But if the NPC was NG: 3 x 2 = 6
:: Level & HD ::
One more thought, I'd be tempted to add +1 for each PC level and +1 for each monster HD.
A first level PC trying to coerce a 10HD Frost Giant or 12LV NPC is going to be difficult.