Dumpshock Forums > Clarification on Social skills?

Full Version: Clarification on Social skills?

Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun

FriendoftheDork

Mar 29 2007, 09:29 PM

Hey after reading up on the social skills, I notice that some skills doesen't fit all that well with the modifiers on the social modifier table.

Mainly, intimidate doesen't really fit with the "target attitude" modifiers. I mean, why would it be easier to intimidate your best friend than your worst enemy? Convince him with negotiation, sure, but scare him into submission?

Why would a big strong troll have MORE difficulty intimidating a lone unarmed Humanis Policlub member than an unbiased orc?

So really, which social skill should the general modifers on the social table be used for? Just negotation, all of them or?...

I know as GM I can simply use the ones I like but I'm not sure what the system is balanced for. By not applying certain modifers I can make some skill attempts too easy for the characters, and some too hard.

Any help (especially errata or FAQ, but also your opinion) is appriciated.

Jaid

Mar 29 2007, 09:43 PM

the friend could be more scared by the fact that this isn't just some random stranger threatening to do horrible things to them, it's their best buddy. IOW, the shock factor could keep them from fully responding as they normally would... it's just from such an unexpected angle, they weren't prepared for it.

the prejudiced humanis goons are firmly convinced of their superiority. even though the troll may be big and strong, they may well think they can outsmart him or that they are quicker than him, because hey, he's a big, dumb, slow troll (in their minds) isn't he?

FriendoftheDork

Mar 29 2007, 09:49 PM

QUOTE (Jaid)

I don't buy it. Your friend will probably think you're joking anyhow, and even Humanis scum ain't so stupid he doesen't KNOW that trolls are good at one thing... beating him into a pulp.

After all, racism is an aspect of fear, and initimidation is the application of fear.

FrankTrollman

Mar 29 2007, 11:26 PM

If your friend said "Seriously, if you keep doing that, I'll punch you in the mouth." Do you think he would actually have to intimidate you to get you to stop? There's a whole extra level where you don't want to piss him off.

Getting a stranger to stop something annoying when his friends are all around can be a lot harder than getting your friend to do the same.

-frank

ornot

Mar 30 2007, 12:48 AM

I don't think you'll get a fixed decision. All these mods are in the hands of the GM, and can be applied at the GMs whim.

QUOTE ("p120")

The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers as he feels appropriate. The Social Modifiers Table (p.122) provides some examples

Personally if I was only using the modifiers in the table I'd be inclined to only use the ones under intimidation for intimidation rolls.

FriendoftheDork

Mar 30 2007, 12:58 AM

QUOTE (ornot)

I don't think you'll get a fixed decision. All these mods are in the hands of the GM, and can be applied at the GMs whim.

QUOTE ("p120")

The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers as he feels appropriate. The Social Modifiers Table (p.122) provides some examples

Personally if I was only using the modifiers in the table I'd be inclined to only use the ones under intimidation for intimidation rolls.

Ah, well that's a good point. I saw a few in the general mods that could be appropriate as well (street cred being a major), but not all of them.

laughingowl

Mar 30 2007, 01:39 AM

A friendly subject is still more lkely to be brow-beaten / intimidated along then somebody that hates you.

How many of us have had friends we have had to intimidate into getting help for a problem.

Strangers / policeman /etc try to intimidate scare the person into treatment but they dont listen, a 'friend' though giving them the results of what is likely to happen, and they listen.

The big difference is a 'friendly' intimidator is unlikely to get the 'is imposing' and very unlikely to get the 'is causing (or has caused) pain).

and the 'Subject belives 'they wouldnt do something stupid / hurt me' is very likely to offset any 'friendly' result.

Though in short a 'friendly' person is still more likely to do something for you then somebody that hates your guts...

No if you hate their guts, the convincing 'harsh' treatments become alot easier / more palatable.

Human tries to convince a Humanis goon to let him pass:
Subject netural (human, but not a member / a known person) +0
Result is annoying to goon. (he was told to keep people out, but hey it is a human, maybe he would be interested in joining) -1

Humanis get +2 as he doesnt belive the human would do something stupid against a brother human.

Intimidator -1 die, Humanis +2 die (might have been better of to con/negotiate).

BIG troll ask to be let pass.
Troll is an Enemy -4 die (the Humanis really isnt going to want to help)
Action is Harmful to NPC -3 (Even if nothing 'serious' he is going to get a lot of crap about caving into a meta-human).
+3 dice Character is physically Imposing (pissed off troll should qualify)

Intimidator -4 dice Humanis +0 dice

All told the Human is going to have a little easier time since the 'action' is less harmful to the person being intimidated. IF needing more help the Troll is likely very easily able to able the 'causing pain' to get more dice.

NOTE: Atleast to me, the causing pain, automatically means the social status is enemy. Save for unusual circumstances with certain fetish.. Torture is not something you do to a friend.

laughingowl

Mar 30 2007, 01:49 AM

QUOTE (ornot)

I don't think you'll get a fixed decision. All these mods are in the hands of the GM, and can be applied at the GMs whim.

QUOTE ("p120")

The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers as he feels appropriate. The Social Modifiers Table (p.122) provides some examples

Personally if I was only using the modifiers in the table I'd be inclined to only use the ones under intimidation for intimidation rolls.

Ornot:

Well the 'risk' to intimidatee should certainly still apply. Being intimidated out of you line of the movie theatre is alot easier then being intimidated to giving you they keys to your car, which is alot easier then being intimidated into killing somebody.

The friendly / enemy table should also be used with caution and would often be a self-cancelling effect.

A friend you are more likely to 'help', yet less likely to belive the would 'do somethign stupid' so may cancel out.

An enemy you are less likely to 'help' but also more prone to belive they would do something stupid...

THough like all modifiers GM is the biggest one.

Shock / Fear / Surprise could cause people to react even if they wouldnt normally.

Dark night Troll jumps out screaming at top of their lungs.

In surprise you jump back (intimidated) and into traffic, getting splattered).

If you had any forewwarning you would have realized the extreme danger (of jumping into traffic) and not jumped back but perhaps angled off, etc.

Likewise:

Humanis on patrol at the edge of their meeting.

Troll Jumps out and intimdates.
Humanis is very likely to run being intimidated and 'go for help' get others.

Humanis meeting is under attack, it is known gun fire has been exchanged and it is a 'fight'

Troll Jumps out and tries to intimidate.
Humanis is less ikely to run, knowing that running well likely just by a few seconds. 'Running for reinforcements' wont do any good, more likely to try to take some shots at the troll.

In general it is easier to convince a friend to do what you want, and harder to convince somebody that hates you......

It is also true it is hard to 'intimidate' somebody who is a friend, (they often wont see you as a friend anymore)

And even hard to use 'extreme' intimiidation without being somebodies enemy. (rest assured you start using pliers to my fingers and you pretty much hit the bottom of my enemy list).

Cheops

Mar 30 2007, 05:33 PM

QUOTE (FriendoftheDork)

Ah, well that's a good point. I saw a few in the general mods that could be appropriate as well (street cred being a major), but not all of them.

Actually I think that it is Notoriety that helps with intimidation.

"Watch out boys, that's the crazed, Crash-addicted, illiterate, Troll who fucks his Johnson over and kills other runners...and innocent bystanders too!"

Anymage

Mar 30 2007, 05:42 PM

It's Street Cred - Notoriety if you're trying to use one of the "gentler" social skills and your rep is a factor. It's Street Cred + Notoriety when you're trying to scare them witless. Even if you don't have much of a reputation for going over the top, someone who makes a name for themselves in the shadows probably engenders fear and respect in equal measures.

DireRadiant

Mar 30 2007, 08:31 PM

QUOTE (FriendoftheDork)

Mainly, intimidate doesen't really fit with the "target attitude" modifiers. I mean, why would it be easier to intimidate your best friend than your worst enemy? Convince him with negotiation, sure, but scare him into submission?

Nasrudith

Mar 30 2007, 09:53 PM

QUOTE (Cheops)

QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 30 2007, 12:58 AM)

Ah, well that's a good point. I saw a few in the general mods that could be appropriate as well (street cred being a major), but not all of them.

Notoriety usually makes sense for intimidation but for qualities granting it can get silly fast.
"Oh no! Its the pacifist hacker who can't even use fight with or without a weapon"! (Incompetence in pistols, long arms, automatics, heavy weapons, unarmed, blades, archery thrown and clubs for over the 35 BP back, but it still makes a point.)
Though at that point the GM should step in and not have notoriety count for that purpose as a common sense kind of thing .

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.