OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences.   Posted by Segev Stormlord.Group: 0
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 83 posts
Wed 9 Feb 2011
at 20:41
OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
It was brought up and I realized that we hadn't discussed it for this game, so I will pose the question here: When it comes to social mechanics and PC-on-PC interaction, how much of Exalted's social combat rules are people comfortable with, and how much would they enjoy using/have being used to model persuading each other IC?

I intend, from the NPC side, to be using it where appropriate. However, sometimes, PCs want to persuade each other, or even to manipulate each other. Before we get into a situation where this might occur, I want to bring it up for discussion: do people want to avoid having this sort of engagement, and rely on persuading each other OOC as much as IC, or do people want to use the social combat mechanics should a conflict of interest arise in the party?
Evangelical Design
 player, 104 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Wed 9 Feb 2011
at 22:42
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
This is tough.  On one hand, if you can't persuade a fellow PC stuff doesn't make sense ("but it works on everybody but these guys!") and there is an over all decrease in the power of social combat.

On the other hand, it isn't cool to boss around another player's character.  Then again, you can always spend Willpower to just negate the social attack, so the danger isn't that high.  I think that influencing other PCs in social combat can be okay as long as it isn't used to put a player in a situation that they aren't comfortable with.
Merlin
 player, 39 posts
Wed 9 Feb 2011
at 23:51
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
In reply to Evangelical Design (msg #2):

Spending WP is sometimes what it takes.

Pushing other people in any way, tends to provoke a fight or flight response. Players of characters that persistently make other PC's use WP to defend against social attacks will wind up getting their PC physically hurt or dead. Winning the battle, but loosing the war.
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 85 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:00
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
In reply to Merlin (msg #3):

It is worth noting that social combat is NOT inherently hostile, IC-wise, anyway. More importantly, reacting with violence to it is near-psychotic behavior, from an IC perspective. It'd be like ending a friendship and punching somebody until they shut up because they try to convince you to quit playing D&D on Thursday nights with your other group of friends and to instead go bowling with the group of friends to which he belongs.
Merlin
 player, 41 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:07
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Merlin:
Players of characters that persistently make other PC's use WP to defend against social attacks


Perhaps we have different definitions for 'Persistently'?

What is yours?

This message was last edited by the player at 00:11, Thu 10 Feb 2011.

Evangelical Design
 player, 107 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:16
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
As long as you make your defense against it cool, you can continue to defend against natural mental influence for a long, long time with the WP you get back from stunts.  NMI only takes 2wp a scene to defend against unless they get unexpected social attacks in.
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 86 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:22
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
In reply to Merlin (msg #5):

"Being annoying and not dropping a subject" is rarely acceptable grounds for punching somebody out in civilized society.
Evangelical Design
 player, 109 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:24
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Using violence is not a regular response to social attacks.
Aya
 player, 105 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:35
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Well. It's not like we can't ret-conn shitt if it goes really badly. I say we give the SC thing a go, see how it works. If it goes badly, wee can change it outt.
Beatrix LeSchaye
 player, 55 posts
 Solar
 Zenith
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:49
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Segev Stormlord:
In reply to Merlin (msg #5):

"Being annoying and not dropping a subject" is rarely acceptable grounds for punching somebody out in civilized society.


No, but it *can* make for great entertainment. ;)

Although generally, in a debate, the first guy to throw a punch is admitting he's lost. Context can matter, for this.
Merlin
 player, 43 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 00:51
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Segev Stormlord:
In reply to Merlin (msg #5):

"Being annoying and not dropping a subject" is rarely acceptable grounds for punching somebody out in civilized society.


Yet we see it all the time in Bars, Class Rooms, India Parliament, etc.

There is also the option for 'flight' you know.....I did say Fight or Flight.
Amerin
 player, 13 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 04:43
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
From Core Page 180:
"Natural mental influence is a normal interaction."

From Core Page 181:
"Unnatural mental influence is magical mental influence.  Targets recognize the supernatural force behind the character's actions.  If this influence is hostile, inappropriate, or used against targets who value their liberty and independence, [sounds like PC's] unnatural mental influence makes enemies." [bracketed words mine]

From this I would derive this guideline: natural is generally okay (as its easier to resist), unnatural is not. (Or, Bad things happen to Bad people)  Examples (because data is the plural of anecdote):  Punching Bob in the face for telling you to get him a coke (for even the twentieth time today) is not okay.  However, your friend Larry is totally not going to fault you for applying the decorative sword you have hanging on the wall to Bob's torso if you both just watched Bob try to cast Dominate Person (or Geas/Sleep/Suggestion/Confusion/etc) on you.

Note to potential Bobs out there: Just because Natural is generally okay, (and so people won't kill you for it) it does not mean that they have to like you (ie. have your back when the bad guys come calling) either.
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 88 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 05:12
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
I have always strongly disliked the RAW on UMI, in particular that it is "obvious" to the mind being affected. This has the consequence of making all Solar Stealth counterproductive, as it takes what might be a successful hiding attempt (they don't notice you) and makes them instantly aware "SOMEBODY IS MESSING WITH MY HEAD!" Because knowing your mind is being screwed with is a very good reason to actively fight it, spending wp is natural in all but the most broken-spirited people unless they KNOW AND TRUST the guy mind-screwing them ALREADY.

For this reason, unless there is objection, I will be running UMI such that it is only "obvious" to the mind being influenced AFTER they have spent the wp to resist it. Before then, the muddling of their minds means they don't, IC, know it's being done. (OOC, transparency will have the victim's PLAYER know it's UMI, but the CHARACTER likely won't, and thus won't have an automatic reason to spend wp to resist it just on the grounds that it's UMI.)
Evangelical Design
 player, 115 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 05:22
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
I'd take it a step further, Segev, and say that people who are mentally influenced with UMI likely don't even know what it is, regardless of spending Willpower, unless they've experienced it before.  People aren't likely to recognize the sensation.

And what I think Merlin's player was trying to say was that Join Battle turns off all social combat.  Well, it does.  But if you Join Battle every time people talk to you, you'll wind up with plenty of problems.
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 89 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 05:31
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Evangelical Design:
I'd take it a step further, Segev, and say that people who are mentally influenced with UMI likely don't even know what it is, regardless of spending Willpower, unless they've experienced it before.  People aren't likely to recognize the sensation.

While I would normally agree with you, the presence of effects which explicitly hide their UMI-ness from people makes me wish not to do so, because I don't want to cheapen them further.
Evangelical Design:
And what I think Merlin's player was trying to say was that Join Battle turns off all social combat.  Well, it does.  But if you Join Battle every time people talk to you, you'll wind up with plenty of problems.

Technically, Join Battle only makes social combat very difficult, since long ticks are 60 ticks, and social combat happens across multiple long ticks. This is RAW, however. If people wish to engage in VERY short-burst efforts to social combat each other during physical fighting, I am inclined to allow it...but only of appropriate sorts. No debates or Intimacy-building, just things like "let's stop fighting and talk this out" or "you're on the wrong side, HE's the bad guy!" or possibly witty repartee (though that's likely NOT social combat at all).

But I'm rambling because it's late.
Evangelical Design
 player, 117 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 13:37
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Segev Stormlord:
While I would normally agree with you, the presence of effects which explicitly hide their UMI-ness from people makes me wish not to do so, because I don't want to cheapen them further.


What effects are you talking about exactly?  I'm not saying people wouldn't recognize that something happened, but most people wouldn't recognize what.  I mean, your average person never gets UMI'd, so why would they know what it feels like?

Segev Stormlord:
Technically, Join Battle only makes social combat very difficult, since long ticks are 60 ticks, and social combat happens across multiple long ticks. This is RAW, however. If people wish to engage in VERY short-burst efforts to social combat each other during physical fighting, I am inclined to allow it...but only of appropriate sorts. No debates or Intimacy-building, just things like "let's stop fighting and talk this out" or "you're on the wrong side, HE's the bad guy!" or possibly witty repartee (though that's likely NOT social combat at all).


I usually allow some social combat banter in fighting as well.
Segev Stormlord
 GM, 90 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 13:54
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Evangelical Design:
Segev Stormlord:
While I would normally agree with you, the presence of effects which explicitly hide their UMI-ness from people makes me wish not to do so, because I don't want to cheapen them further.


What effects are you talking about exactly?  I'm not saying people wouldn't recognize that something happened, but most people wouldn't recognize what.  I mean, your average person never gets UMI'd, so why would they know what it feels like?
Things like Droning Suggestion, which explicitly state that you can't tell anything UMI-based happened without spending Even More Willpower just to be able to do so.
Evangelical Design
 player, 119 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 20:30
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
In reply to Segev Stormlord (msg #17):

I like to think about it like this.

If you don't spend Willpower, you feel fine.  If you do spend Willpower, you feel kinda funny.  You might know what that funny feeling means.  With powers that don't let you feel funny, you spend the Willpower but have no idea.

But there is no reason in the game that spending Willpower sends a giant "YOU WERE JUST UMI'ed!" alarm up in your brain.  That's a very specific feeling that no one could recognize unless they knew what it was.
Aya
 player, 112 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 20:36
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
I donn't like that much. I don''t think anyone but solars get a "You just got UMI" useed on you charm, and to be frank, itt's a wasist of XP.
Evangelical Design
 player, 120 posts
 Sidereal
 Serenity
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 22:02
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
I didn't say that you shouldn't know you got UMI'ed when you spend the Willpower, I said that if you've never been UMI'ed before or hadn't studied it, such as if you're a pitiful mortal extra, that you probably won't jump to "mindrape" that fast.
Aya
 player, 115 posts
Thu 10 Feb 2011
at 22:11
Re: OOC: Social Attacks and people's preferences
Ahhh. Allright. Missunderstood.