D&D's Broken Mechanic

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by brian at 2005-04-15 14:49:51
Converted from Phorums BB System

There IS one area where D&D's mechanics simply fall apart.

The d20 system for magic and combat are almost perfectly integrated and remarkably well balanced. They incorporate skills, feats, spells.

So where does the game break down? The social stuff, naturally.

There are a half-dozen different mechanics for influencing other characters' attitudes in the game. They integrate clumsily or not at all. It reminds me, actually, of the ENTIRE D&D system back in the early 80s.

In D&D 3.5, characters have Charisma. They also have Charisma-based skills, like Diplomacy and Intimidate. So far, so good. But these skills allow a character to nudge NPCs up (and sometimes down) a scale that's non-numeric (hostile to friendly) in a way that's entirely subjective. The system takes no account of other factors, such as Will, Wisdom, or Intelligence. It also doesn't integrate in any fluid way with spells or other effects (like bardic music or psionics) that affect NPC attitudes.

The result is that players often shy away from interpersonal-skill based characters. There's simply no reliable game-mechanic way for them to affect their world.

Two solutions, one short and one long-winded.

1. Reduce all social-checks (soothing a charging animal, diplomacy, etc.) to a standard action. Yes, this is unrealistic, but so are magic missiles. Allow a charming rogue to be charming quickly or he'll never dare do anything except pull a knife.

2. Develop a quick, fun, playable d20 resolution system for social interactions. One possibility would simply match a d20 based charisma/skill/feat/spell effect against the target, who would then get a will saving throw.

Example 1: (Diplomacy) Yosemite Sam is attacking Bugs Bunny. Yosemite's attitude rating is 30, or "extremely hostile/attacking". Bugs tries a Diplomacy check. "Hold on!" Bugs says. "I've got some carrots to share." He's got 10 Diplomacy skill ranks, plus a Charisma bonus of three. The DM gives him a +2 bonus because of a plausible bribe. He rolls a d20 and gets a 5 for a total of 20.

Yosemite has a Will save of +4, and he's already begun combat which allows him a +2, but he only rolls a six. He fails the matched check by 8 points. As a result, his Attitude Rating drops from 30 to 22, which is only in the range of "distrustful/uncooperative". Yosemite breaks off the attack, but keeps his shotgun aimed.

Example 2: (Charm Person) It's round 2 and Yosemite Sam is still "distrustful/uncooperative". Bugs doesn't like the look of that shotgun. He throws a Charm Person (which is the social equivalent of a True Strike spell) allowing a +20 on his Charisma roll. Add another +3 for Charisma modifier, and a 7 for his d20 roll and Bugs has a whopping 30 on his effect. (Some new feats might allow a character to combine a skill like Diplomacy with a spell like Charm Person or Dominate Person.)

Yosemite has a Will save of +4. He also has a +2 versus enchantments. He rolls a 9 on his d20, for a total of 15. He misses by a whopping fifteen. That whittles his attitude rating down to 7, which is "friendly".

Example 3: (Intimidate) It's round 3 and Bugs asks Sam nicely to get rid of Daffy Duck. Sam tries to Intimidate the duck into leaving. Sam (being a bully) has 12 ranks of Intimidate, but his Charisma modifier is -3. He rolls a 9 on his d20, for a total of 18.

Daffy has an initial attitude rating of 15, which is "indifferent/skeptical". He's a pretty stout soul and has a Will Save of +7. He rolls a 12, for a total of 19. Because he's bested Sam's matched check by one point, Daffy's attitude rating actually rises from 15 to 16, slipping him over into the "distrustful/uncooperative" range. He draws his rubber mallet.

Just as in regular combat, there would be modifiers for racial difference, class difference, and situational issues. A character might get +2 on Intimidate for having a weapon drawn, but -2 on Diplomacy for holding a battle axe ready.

Obviously, this needs a lot of work. But it seems like it might offer a more fluid, integrated direction than the current hodge-podge.

The rule mechanics might also actually encourage some fun role-playing. I love the idea of a wily, high-Charisma sorcerer talking his way through a crowd of bemused orcs...

Brian

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Darrin Bright at 2005-04-18 05:31:51
Converted from Phorums BB System

Interesting. That was a much better explanation of why the social mechanics in D&D break down. Sounds similar to having "Social Hit Points" where you gradually wear down someone's resistance with spells/skills/attacks similar to the combat system.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Elicia Davenport at 2005-05-16 08:54:20
Converted from Phorums BB System

Interesting system you have here. How would you interface it with player characters? Would they be bound by the same rolled results? Would they be immune?

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Alex M at 2005-06-19 14:09:37
Converted from Phorums BB System

Monte Cook, one of D&D's original creators, also thinks that the Diplomacy Check mechanic is broken. See
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?otherd20_Diplomacy
where he offers a couple solutions, one of which he has playtested extensively.

Not just Diplomacy, but ANY mechanic having a fixed DC is broken when it involves an interaction with another character.

Another example of a broken mechanic is Tumble. Fixed DC 15, no matter who you're tumbling past. If you already have 15 skill points in Tumble, you don't even need to roll! This makes no sense! If you're tumbling past an opponent who is incredibly dexterous and strong, there should be a chance of failure. Your opponent should get some sort of oppose check, and if he succeeds, then he gets an attack of opportunity.

We've playtested using an attack roll as an oppose check (not as an attack), and if it succeeds, then the opponent gets an attack of opportunity (rolling another attack roll). This seems fair; the tumbling character gets two chances to avoid an attack of opportunity (the first attack roll to oppose the tumble, and then the attack itself) and the attacker has a chance of foiling the tumble.

-Alex

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Seriy Volk at 2005-10-15 13:07:51
Converted from Phorums BB System

hey yeah,

for social skills, I would suggest Iron Heroes by Malhavoc Press. The rules are varied and precise, and pretty easy to apply to unusual situations. I have a character who is mostly a gumbi [which is slang for a high-charisma character with little in the way of actual fighting ability] and he has forced me to read and re-read the ruleset.

Hope that helps some.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Kele T at 2005-12-04 02:27:20
Converted from Phorums BB System

Just a thought but isnt the point of a role playing game to role play. My gaming group rarely asks for Diplomacy checks at all because its much more fun to try and make an intresting argument on the fly. After all the d20 is a bit random for speaking. What we normally go with is to just look at a characters stats. So if you have a 15 charisma and Diplomacy maxed for you level then the DM simply bends his creature actions more to the players will than if someone with an 8 charisma and no ranks in Dip. made the exact same argument in-character. This way you avoid the passive player syndrome of "i just role". This is, of course, much harder to do the first few times you play with a new DM as they might not be used to how thier players communicate but over time most groups get pretty tight from my experiance.

Cooks first method could be used to give concrete stats for situations. hostile(-20) making a charisma 15 with and effective skill of 12 in diplomacy into a -6 over all modifier to the argument. But the bottem line is that good roleplaying should ALWAYS be more effective than a dice role. We get our number crunching from teh hack and slack half of the game no reason to make the roleplaying half also number crunching.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Charlie Dunwoody at 2005-12-12 04:57:05
Converted from Phorums BB System

Kele T,

I think in the right group, your example of DM controlled roleplaying can work. You also point out that that method is tough to use with new groups and I'd agree.

The question is, though, is how much weight should a DM put on number of skill ranks in Diplomacy, bonuses from Charisma, and feats? Given the choice between +2 hp a level or a +2 bonus to Diplomacy, is taking a 10 in Con and 14 in a Cha a choice many players will make?

Some players will make that choice simply because of roleplaying and that's great. Some players, though, would like to compare the mechanical advantages between the two options. Without a set of concrete rules, even if a DM rules more on the fly, those players are out of luck.

You give some ideas on how to use the mechanics with some good examples. And I agree that good roleplaying should be rewarded. However, I think game stats should actually carry more weight than roleplaying, however.

If in real life I'm not charismatic, I might want to play a character like that in a game. Or a strong fighter if I'm physically weak or a genius wizard if I'm not a genius. I wouldn't expect a DM to require me to do feats of strength in place of rolling or memorize complicated forumulas rather than noting down bonus spells. By the same token, I'd hope my DM would let my stats and high Charisma score carry more weight than my own less charismatic roleplaying.
Charlie

[mudpyr8]

I think what you need is a system that rewards good roleplaying, but doesn't require it. We play rpgs to be something we aren't and requireing every player to have good diplomacy is as rediculous as requiring them to cast spells.

Other games use a more direct mechanic. There is a mechanic to influence someone without skills, feats, etc. Such abilities then simply enhance that mechanic. So, the following might work:

Modifier Situation or Character’s Action
-2 Inappropriate setting
-4 Very inappropriate setting
-2 In combat
-2 At a disadvantage
-6 Covered

Influence agrees/conflicts with target’s Alignment
+/-2 Moderate
+/-4 Strong
+/-6 Total

Reputation relevant/contrary to Influence conditions
+/-2 low
+/-4 medium
+/-6 high
+/-8 extreme
-2 to -6 Influence runs against existing moods

+2 per 5 Character makes appropriate Interaction Skill Roll vs. DC 5
A natural 1 may anger the target if he makes a successful Will save.

+2 Target is Surprised

+2 Exhibiting a Power or superior technology

+2 Violent action
+4 Extremely violent action
+6 Incredibly violent action

+2 Appropriate setting
+4 Very appropriate setting

+4 Target is in partial retreat
+4 Target is in full retreat/has been captured

Roleplaying
+2 Good soliloquy
+4 Excellent soliloquy
+6 Incredible soliloquy

+2 Need (character appealling for help genuinely seems to need it)
+2 Logic (statements are extremely logical and well thought out)

Target Makes Will Save vs DC 10 plus above modifiers.

SUCCESS:
Influence has no Effect.

FAILURE:
Target hesitates enough so that the attacker may act before him this round, or receives +2 to any contrary influence saves within 1 round. Target considers what the attacker says, but will only comply if it is entirely within his best interest.

FAILURE BY 5:
Target is very impressed. He hesitates as above, and only performs a Standard Action during his next action. He considers very deeply what the attacker says, and may comply with requests or obey orders which seem worthwhile to him. He receives +2 to any contrary influence saves for the next 4 rounds.

FAILURE BY 10:
Target is awed. He will not act for 1 Round, is flat-footed, and possibly will do as the attacker commands. If he is friendly, he is inspired and may follow the character into danger; he will comply with most requests and obey most orders. He receives +4 to any contrary influence saves for the next 4 rounds.

FAILURE BY 15:
Target is cowed. He may surrender, run away, or faint. He is dazed, and will nearly always follow commands. If he is friendly, he becomes inflamed, and will follow character into any danger, comply with virtually any request, or obey virtually any order. He requires a successful influence check to be shaken out of it, and resists that by +4.

This is adapted from a game I play on a regular basis and the mechanic works wonderfully whether it is intimidation, diplomacy, persuasion, posturing, bluff, whatever. The DCs might be a little off, but the general idea is the same. Maybe the modifiers have to be halved or something.

[Destriarch]

The magic system in D20 is far from what I'd call 'well-balanced'. As soon as a wizard attains a reasonably high level, around what, 10 or 12, he becomes an omni-character. The combination of Detect/Remove Traps, Silence and Invisibility alone practically negates the need for a thief in the party, and the bigger spells can deal ludicrous amounts of damage compared to what even a high-level fighter can dish out. Sure they are limited in number, but this isn't often that big a consideration since the wizard can in many cases stop and read up to get 'em back again.

I agree totally though that the D20 system doesn't encourage social interaction; it's one of the main reasons I never play it. That and I don't like the way D20 handles class-based characters and I've never been a big advocate of level-based progression.

Ash

[RSC]

Sure they are limited in number, but this isn't often that big a consideration since the wizard can in many cases stop and read up to get 'em back again.
What are you talking about? I know of no cases in which this happens. It might happen for some obscure prestige class I've never heard of, but it's certainly not something that happens in "many cases".

[Kravell]

I agree with RSC. That eight hours of rest requirement does slow down regaining spells when you're a wizard.

Charlie