Does the Alliance system support diplomacy?

[David_Aselrik]

If you can learn OOG skill with weapons with practice, you can also learn OOG social and diplomatic skills with practice. As an earlier post mentioned, the rules are for things that need clear explanations for simulated effects; it's not to completely level the playing field for OOG skills (for example, the rule book has an example of not playing a bard if you can't even carry a tune).

If this skill is something that interests you and you want to increase your OOG skill in it, there are many books available on negotiation strategy and theory- check out your local library or bookstore. Personally, I recommend the best-selling "Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In" by Roger Fisher and William L. Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project.

The thing is that you can turn your first sentence around on itself. "If you can learn IG skill with weapons through BP, you should also be able to learn IG social and diplomatic skills with BP." In no way am I advocating social skills bought with BP. What I believe is that the very mechanics of how the game is played should be enhanced with more social opportunities.

Imagine I'm a new player and I tell you I want to become the best Shield Fighter I can be. Can you think of all the things you'd tell me about? All the IG skills, the OOG skills, the sections in the rulebook about that.

Now imagine I'm a new player and I tell you I want to become the best Merchant I can be. What kinds of things will you tell me about? How does the game engage a player like that? (This is a very real question, one of the people I recently recruited wants to be a merchant and not much else).

 

[EricMarsters]

If you can learn OOG skill with weapons with practice, you can also learn OOG social and diplomatic skills with practice. As an earlier post mentioned, the rules are for things that need clear explanations for simulated effects; it's not to completely level the playing field for OOG skills (for example, the rule book has an example of not playing a bard if you can't even carry a tune).

If this skill is something that interests you and you want to increase your OOG skill in it, there are many books available on negotiation strategy and theory- check out your local library or bookstore. Personally, I recommend the best-selling "Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In" by Roger Fisher and William L. Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project.

The thing is that you can turn your first sentence around on itself. "If you can learn IG skill with weapons through BP, you should also be able to learn IG social and diplomatic skills with BP." In no way am I advocating social skills bought with BP. What I believe is that the very mechanics of how the game is played should be enhanced with more social opportunities.

Imagine I'm a new player and I tell you I want to become the best Shield Fighter I can be. Can you think of all the things you'd tell me about? All the IG skills, the OOG skills, the sections in the rulebook about that.

Now imagine I'm a new player and I tell you I want to become the best Merchant I can be. What kinds of things will you tell me about? How does the game engage a player like that? (This is a very real question, one of the people I recently recruited wants to be a merchant and not much else).

Well, there's a gentleman named Dave Russell, who plays Bob the Baker (or BtB on the boards), who plays a merchant. He's VERY good at his job. Perhaps you should reach out to him, and talk to him about trade secrets? Or, have your friend reach out to him in game. I know there was one player from your chapter David that was going to be in Chicago at the same time as him, that also played a merchant. I know Dave was really looking forward to getting to talk shop about being a merchant in Alliance...

Just a thought.

 

[Wraith]

Playing a merchant can be interesting. My secondary is a professional cook and tavernkeeper who makes and sells things in his spare time. The problem I've found with him is simply that there isn't much of a market for regular production items compared to components and MIs. Once the majority of the populace has arcane or rendered armor and magic weapons, they'll probably never buy another blacksmith-produced tag. Scrolls and alchemy keep selling a bit longer, but the things that are really popular need a large investment of build to manufacture, and even then unless you're rolling in cash batching them and still making a profit is a fine line to walk. It is a dilemma.

 

[Gandian Ravenscroft]

Now imagine I'm a new player and I tell you I want to become the best Merchant I can be. What kinds of things will you tell me about? How does the game engage a player like that? (This is a very real question, one of the people I recently recruited wants to be a merchant and not much else).

If a person is gung-ho about going merchant Build-wise, I'd tell them to be an Artisan, get Merchant, Read/Write, some Craftsman, and two/three/all of the Production skills (Alchemy, Blacksmith, Create Potion, Create Scroll). But for the most part, a role like merchant is really accomplished through roleplaying, not build. Just having the skills doesn't make people buy from you; being a likable, reliable, and helpful businessman/businesswoman gets you money.

As for diplomacy vs. beating things up, my character always tries and initial attempt to diplomat his way out of a problem before resorting to an attack. On multiple occasions, I've just talked my way out of situations with undead, rather than just running in and swinging pipe. If I had attacked rather than negotiated, myself and others probably would have died. If you go into a LARP with the idea of just beating down anything that moves, you're going to die. It takes a combination of talk and action to get what needs to be done done. So yes, I believe the game supports diplomacy.

 

[Octaine]

Playing a merchant can be interesting. My secondary is a professional cook and tavernkeeper who makes and sells things in his spare time. The problem I've found with him is simply that there isn't much of a market for regular production items compared to components and MIs. Once the majority of the populace has arcane or rendered armor and magic weapons, they'll probably never buy another blacksmith-produced tag. Scrolls and alchemy keep selling a bit longer, but the things that are really popular need a large investment of build to manufacture, and even then unless you're rolling in cash batching them and still making a profit is a fine line to walk. It is a dilemma.

FOOD!!!! everyone loves food, I can sell food without any BP to spend and make coin off it.

 

[phedre]

Playing a merchant can be interesting. My secondary is a professional cook and tavernkeeper who makes and sells things in his spare time. The problem I've found with him is simply that there isn't much of a market for regular production items compared to components and MIs. Once the majority of the populace has arcane or rendered armor and magic weapons, they'll probably never buy another blacksmith-produced tag. Scrolls and alchemy keep selling a bit longer, but the things that are really popular need a large investment of build to manufacture, and even then unless you're rolling in cash batching them and still making a profit is a fine line to walk. It is a dilemma.

FOOD!!!! everyone loves food, I can sell food without any BP to spend and make coin off it.

Agreed. Food FTW.

 

[jpariury]

So yes, I believe the game supports diplomacy.

I think it important to delineate between the Alliance game as run and the Alliance game as a rules system. The game as run, sure, it supports it, but the game as a rules system does not, as far as I can tell.

 

[Sym of Moria]

There is plenty of need for merchant type characters. Consumables IG such as scrolls, alchemy and potions will always be needed that will always foster PC to PC economy as they seek out a Alchemist or scroll / potion maker to purchase usable good from.
You get PC's exchanging coin.

Diplomacy to get out of situations is there. If you can talk your way out of it.. plot will allow for that from what I have seen. Its true that there is no "Diplomacy" skill unless you take Craftsmaniplomat.. but you need to keep in mind not everything plot throwns out you you will be able to talk your way thru..

Encounter Heads are plots eyes and ears and if you make a good argument IG im sure they will consult and render a verdict... favorable or otherwise.

I dont think a "Diplomacy skill" is required in the rules set. Scott pretty much summed it up.

I have seen players exchange IG and OOG currency for clothing and Physreps with valid item stags... also for Wine and other perishable goods.

I have a MWE character who ran a casino in Ashbury city ....
I had table games (poker, and black jack)
I had the running of the knights (horse racing) players bet on the out come of the races
I had a solvable puzzle (Rubic's cube) you had 1 minute to work with it on a sand timer...
2 silver a try.. if you got one side you got your 2 silver back, if you got 2 sides 5 silver, 3 sides 1 gold, solve the cube in the minute 10 gold.

I made a LOT of gold that weekend..

I had 3 pc's I paid to serve drinks and be guards in the casino...and I was able to donate to the orphanage some of my profits as I had promised.

That was fun playing that PC.

 

[Dan Nickname Beshers]

So yes, I believe the game supports diplomacy.

I think it important to delineate between the Alliance game as run and the Alliance game as a rules system. The game as run, sure, it supports it, but the game as a rules system does not, as far as I can tell.

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

 

[Duke Frost]

So yes, I believe the game supports diplomacy.

I think it important to delineate between the Alliance game as run and the Alliance game as a rules system. The game as run, sure, it supports it, but the game as a rules system does not, as far as I can tell.

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

Or, as a rule system, has no need for a diplomacy mechanic.

Scott

 

[David_Aselrik]

I think it important to delineate between the Alliance game as run and the Alliance game as a rules system. The game as run, sure, it supports it, but the game as a rules system does not, as far as I can tell.

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

Or, as a rule system, has no need for a diplomacy mechanic.

Scott

Why even have a rulebook at all?

When you say things like, "Oh, my chapter owner, 'Work's his butt off so we can have an amazing game' does all sorts of amazing things with the diplomacy side of things" you're settling for a nonexistant system that could provide your owner with better tools to run a better game. Character skills are such a tiny part of the game, what the game system lacks is rules for engaging the players in various ways outside of combat.

 

[Robb G]

or.. as i have argued before... what you call "rules" i call "restrictions"

 

[jpariury]

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

I don't know that there's a difference.

Or, as a rule system, has no need for a diplomacy mechanic.

I'm not certain that this is true. We have a combat system that attempts to compensate for a lack of oog-ability through inflation of the effect of what successes are achieved, why shouldn't we dedicate some effort to seeking out a clear-cut way to do that in the more ephemeral roleplay aspects of the game?

I'm not saying that I have the Golden Ticket on how to address it, or that it can necessarily be done in an easy-to-apply fix, but I do think it's worth considering.

 

[Mike Ventrella]

or.. as i have argued before... what you call "rules" i call "restrictions"

Yeah, well, you're a libertarian.

 

[Mike Ventrella]

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

I don't know that there's a difference.

Or, as a rule system, has no need for a diplomacy mechanic.

I'm not certain that this is true. We have a combat system that attempts to compensate for a lack of oog-ability through inflation of the effect of what successes are achieved, why shouldn't we dedicate some effort to seeking out a clear-cut way to do that in the more ephemeral roleplay aspects of the game?

I'm not saying that I have the Golden Ticket on how to address it, or that it can necessarily be done in an easy-to-apply fix, but I do think it's worth considering.

I am definitely not in favor of rules telling people they have to pretend you're a great diplomat if you aren't, or you're a great singer just because you bought the skill, or pretend you really outran that troll because you bought a skill to make you run fast, and so on.

The less mechanics the better. We have to have rules for combat and spells, but we don't have rules saying that you automatically hit because you bought a specific skill.

There seems to be a movement among some to make our game more like a computer game or a tabletop game, and I want the exact opposite of that.

 

[jpariury]

(flipping the quote around for flow)

We have to have rules for combat and spells, but we don't have rules saying that you automatically hit because you bought a specific skill.

I agree, and that's not what I'm suggesting.

I am definitely not in favor of rules telling people they have to pretend you're a great diplomat if you aren't, or you're a great singer

And yet, we have rules telling people that they're great warriors even if they aren't.

With our combat system, you still have to successfully hit someone. But once you do, if you have spent build on certain skills, the effect of that successful strike is greater than for someone who has not purchased those skills. By the same token, I imagine some form of diplomacy skill could be created that allowed someone to improve the impact of their negotiations. As a fuzzy concept and somewhat off the cuff, I imagine this could work out like "Generate Trust: With this skill, once per day, you may deliver an Arcane Charm effect to one target. This is done by maintaining eye contact while speaking directly to them for (some determined period of time)". Much like how you have to successfully strike someone to deliver your super-powerful Eviscerating blow, or how you need to maintain eye contact for 30 seconds to deliver a Vampire Charm, I believe it would be possible to create skills that use existing roleplay-focused game-mechanics.

Even if we wanted to stick with the existing effects, there are a number that lend themselves to such skills: Charm, Love, Paranoia, Fear, Terror, Vampire Charm. I'm not saying that they all must be accessible, but they are in place already... we're just talking about using them in a new way. We could also create skills like "Inspire", which could give a sort of "dumb defense/protective" versus Fear or Terror.

It doesn't need to create new calls. It doesn't mean you get to do something you're not doing. It just means you get to give it a shot, and if you're successful, you get a leg up on those that didn't try to build that character type.

 

[David_Aselrik]

We have to have rules for combat and spells, but we don't have rules saying that you automatically hit because you bought a specific skill.

If I buy 2 proficiencies, each time I hit, I'm getting a "second hit" in for free. We also have skills that automatically make someone else *miss* when they hit.

Imagine these two scenarios. In each one, it is the same player with the same OOG skill in RP. He has the same amount of charisma in each scenario.

The town is in the path of an undead horde and the players must convince the king to send reinforcements from his army to aid the town.
1) The player is a High Orc with 4 profs and 3 slays. He talks to the king's diplomat and convinces the king to send 100 men.
2) The player is a Human Artisan with Merchant, Potion Making, Alchemy, and 5 ranks Craftsman Diplomat. This character swings for 2s. He talks to the king's diplomat and convinces the king to send... 100 men.

In combat, a skilled player will strike twice as many times as an unskilled player. Their character may also do twice as much damage every strike. In non-combat roles, there is no method of being more effective *when you succeed* than a lower level character. There is supposed to be this entire imaginary world outside of the adventuring group, but there are no mechanics for interacting with that world except for what Plot throws in there.

 

[Fynwei]

There is supposed to be this entire imaginary world outside of the adventuring group, but there are no mechanics for interacting with that world except for what Plot throws in there.

Have you heard of an IBGA (In-between game action)? These allow you to interact with people in the world outside of the allotted time in a game. You are able to travel, write letters, talk to people, etc. You are allowed to submit IBGA's to tell plot what your character is up to between games, and in special circumstances, they can cover larger sections of time. Some chapters have maps available that will tell you what towns are visitable (for the SoMN map, email plot@mnalliance.com and I'll send it your way) and you can ask us which towns are within a feasible walking distance for between games and how much time you'd be able to spend there in-between games.

Example: Brukka the wolf scavenger has become interested in the local orc tribe. She travels to their territory, and attempts to make friends with some of the younger orcs. She brings with her as presents some rabbit furs she hunted earlier this week. She also brings her ball, in hopes of playing a game of Bloodball with them. Plot: If she succeeds in befriending them, she will be spending the rest of the month with them. If she gets driven off, she will spend the rest of the month working as a tracker for her mercenary contacts.

One's own skill in diplomacy is one's own. In my opinion, it is entirely fair to only have the character based on this, without modifiers. If a PC can't convince me they're of good intention, I'm not going to believe it (and am going to be able to be more immersed in the game than having to step OOC to figure out whose charisma score is higher). Some people make a conscious effort to make themselves more or less diplomatic/charismatic/shrewd/appeasing/etc.

 

[Duke Frost]

Does not support diplomacy, or does not address diplomacy?

I don't know that there's a difference.

Or, as a rule system, has no need for a diplomacy mechanic.

I'm not certain that this is true. We have a combat system that attempts to compensate for a lack of oog-ability through inflation of the effect of what successes are achieved, why shouldn't we dedicate some effort to seeking out a clear-cut way to do that in the more ephemeral roleplay aspects of the game?

I'm not saying that I have the Golden Ticket on how to address it, or that it can necessarily be done in an easy-to-apply fix, but I do think it's worth considering.

My comment is neither true nor untrue. It is my opinion and my perspective. I never meant it to be anything more or less. I feel we primarily only need rules so our character can do things the players can't do safely (hit someone with a sword, poison someone) or can't do at all (cast a flame bolt, create a magic item). I feel we should have as few rules as possible that interfere with roleplay. I think this also answers, from my perspective, "Why have a rulebook at all?"

Scott K.

 

[jpariury]

I feel we should have as few rules as possible that interfere with roleplay.

I'm not certain I agree (with the sentiment, not that you feel it ). We already have numerous rules that interfere with roleplay (just two examples: no being the "Exception to the rule" when it comes to playing your race, and no laughing in the face of Fear unless you spent build to do so). I think that there could be rules that enhance a player's ability to "be all they can't be" and be more charming or intimidating than some other schmo in the rule system. If it's a roleplaying game, why shouldn't there be more rules about roleplaying?