[Cyrilin]

Hello, people of the Shadows.

I am starting a new game and one of my characters wanted to make a very social-focused Dryad. While I'm not against the concept, I was wondering just how far social rolls go. Their dicepools for social tests hover around 20 and while I don't mind her being super great at it, I am worried that this could be used to basically circumvent half the challenges in a campaign and leave all other players relegated to the sidelines.

How do you deal with very social people, what do you let them get away with and how do you design your scenarios so they don't utterly dominate the game and leave the other players just watching them being awesome?

Edit: Of course, since she put a lot of points into being social, it should still be great and useful and everything. Just not completely dominate the campaign.

[Jayde Moon]

Keep in mind dice pool modifiers for Social rolls.  You can find some on the GM Screen as well as in the back of the Core rulebook.

A suspicious enemy that they are convincing to do something that could end up being harmful to the enemy would net an immediate -8 to their Dice Pool, and that's just a surface glance.  does the character possess the appropriate background information to make their negotiation more plausible?  No?  Another -2.

And these are not the end all, be all.  You can make up your own Modifiers as well.

is it a time of day when someone talking to the guard would be unusual?  -2.  Highly unusual?  -4.  It never happens because he's guarding a nuclear silo?  -6.

Then you can also give bonuses to the NPC based on their own posture.

Finally, what does a success mean?  Scamming your way past a guard works for a few minutes, but eventually, the guard might realize he's been had.  People 'come to their senses' after the intoxicatingly beautiful woman has walked away and they are no longer in a desire state.

And there are just some situations where as the GM you can rule that there is no means to convince someone without magic or having done a crap ton of legwork.

If I'm guarding an Ares R&D facility and a dryad walks up in street clothes, she will NEVER persuade me to open the door.  She might persuade me to meet with her later for drinks (and then her buds can knock me out and take my access badge), but open the door for her on the spot?  No way.

[TheWayfinder]

To add to Jayde Moon's post, remember that NPCs are people, and they have agendas.  Just as being good at weapons and combat doesn't mean you'll always be successful in combat, being good in social skills and graces doesn't mean you will always get your way with people, even if you succeed in making them like you. 

I remember once I was running a d20 Star Wars game, and one of my players made a female Zeltran.  A Zeltran is an alien that emits pheromones and is usually pretty handsome.  His idea was to achieve all the effects of a Jedi Mind Trick, but with sheer Charisma.  And he went full slut with this character, to the point it got really disturbing that the other players had to intervene on her behalf because there is an actual insanity called Nymphomania. 

Generally, it worked where she encountered humanoid males that looked reasonably human (humans, zabraks, chiss, etc.).  And it worked with females too.  She was able to get transportation free of charge (well, without credits, anyway), ask crime bosses to hide her and her companions, get equipment at much lower prices, and so on.  Where she ran into roadblocks was where NPCs had bigger agendas going on.  For instance, I had an Imperial Commander who was hell-bent for leather to eradicate a Rebel cell over a world, and if he failed, he'd have to apologize to Darth Vader.  A few of the PCs, including the Zeltran girl, was captured, and the Zeltran succeeded in seducing the commander, but only that the commander was willing to let her live and be with him, but the others were going to be handed over to the executioner.  This forced her to rely on skills that her player really didn't concentrate on, such as stealth and computer use skills so that she could escape from the commander's quarters, distract the guards attention, and help her companions escape custody. 

So there are always limits to how powerful such abilities are.  In fact, when she tried to distract the guards, she still had to draw a blaster to kill them once the other PCs had escaped.  Because no matter how pretty someone is, that can't trump strong agendas. 

[Beta]

On top of what Jayde Moon said, two other thoughts:

- Remember that goons add their professionalism rating to all their defensive social roles.

- Think about how someone would react before things get to the point of roling dice.  Approaching someone at a bar may not make them all that suspicious, but if you are guarding a high security door where nobody should be showing up, the starting point is probably more like hostile unless the character is in an effective disguise.

- Spirits, watcher spirits, security cameras and drones don’t care how charming you are, and neither does the astral mage or guard at the other end of the camera.

- Remind the player that they won’t be able to charm their way through everything, so they’d best have a plan B *

* James Bond may be a fair model, where he gets ridiculously far on charm, but to actually save the day he needs to deploy some other skills (well, except in Goldfinger, where by borderline sexual assault he somehow so charms a previously hostile NPC that she turns on her boss and calls the feds with the bad guy’s plans.  I’m thinking edged role with one of those hot streaks on exploding sixes)

[Kincaid]

* James Bond may be a fair model, where he gets ridiculously far on charm, but to actually save the day he needs to deploy some other skills (well, except in Goldfinger, where by borderline sexual assault he somehow so charms a previously hostile NPC that she turns on her boss and calls the feds with the bad guy’s plans.  I’m thinking edged role with one of those hot streaks on exploding sixes)

She was also a lesbian.  So lots of exploding sixes?  And/or Fleming was not the most open-minded of authors.

[farothel]

* James Bond may be a fair model, where he gets ridiculously far on charm, but to actually save the day he needs to deploy some other skills (well, except in Goldfinger, where by borderline sexual assault he somehow so charms a previously hostile NPC that she turns on her boss and calls the feds with the bad guy’s plans.  I’m thinking edged role with one of those hot streaks on exploding sixes)

She was also a lesbian.  So lots of exploding sixes?  And/or Fleming was not the most open-minded of authors.

Probably more a product of his time (the Bond novels by Fleming were all written in the 50s and early 60s).

[TheWayfinder]

* James Bond may be a fair model, where he gets ridiculously far on charm, but to actually save the day he needs to deploy some other skills (well, except in Goldfinger, where by borderline sexual assault he somehow so charms a previously hostile NPC that she turns on her boss and calls the feds with the bad guy’s plans.  I’m thinking edged role with one of those hot streaks on exploding sixes)

She was also a lesbian.  So lots of exploding sixes?  And/or Fleming was not the most open-minded of authors.

Open-minded is code these days for "non-threatening."  In this pussified world, authors like Ian Fleming would be most refreshing.

[Kincaid]

There's a pretty big gulf between being non-threatening and thinking that all a lesbian needs to "change her mind" is the right man.  I'll give Fleming a pass since it was 1959.  Less so in 2015.

[witchdoctor]

* James Bond may be a fair model, where he gets ridiculously far on charm, but to actually save the day he needs to deploy some other skills (well, except in Goldfinger, where by borderline sexual assault he somehow so charms a previously hostile NPC that she turns on her boss and calls the feds with the bad guy’s plans.  I’m thinking edged role with one of those hot streaks on exploding sixes)

She was also a lesbian.  So lots of exploding sixes?  And/or Fleming was not the most open-minded of authors.

Probably more a product of his time (the Bond novels by Fleming were all written in the 50s and early 60s).

That gave me a thought, a pornomancer could be derails by the target simply not being interested in her gender. Sure she can wrap straight men around her finger six ways to Sunday but if the guy simply isn't interested in women he simply isn't interested in women, no matter how beautiful or provocatively dressed you are you can't get around that so she will have to resort to more traditional means of persuading him, like logic or straight out lying.

[Kincaid]

I take a broader view of seduction, so it includes things beyond simply sexual temptation (I'm borrowing from L5R here).  I admit that part of this stems from getting tired of seeing 40+ year-old men roleplay strippers, but it has the added benefit of making seduction a more expansive specialization.  If you're appealing to someone's appetites (sexual or otherwise), I'll probably allow you to roll seduction.

[witchdoctor]

I take a broader view of seduction, so it includes things beyond simply sexual temptation (I'm borrowing from L5R here).  I admit that part of this stems from getting tired of seeing 40+ year-old men roleplay strippers, but it has the added benefit of making seduction a more expansive specialization.  If you're appealing to someone's appetites (sexual or otherwise), I'll probably allow you to roll seduction.

True but I would give them a negative as while you may be appealing to their appetites they'll be less easily swayed by someone who does not appeal to them physically or sexually. Just a thought.

[Beta]

Seduction?  I wouldn't even know off hand what skill to lead with on that in Shadowrun.  I suppose depending on the details it could be con, negotiate, or potentially even intimidate?  I do find the selection of social skills in SR clunky at times but I suppose constraint breeds creativity?

[TheWayfinder]

Seduction?  I wouldn't even know off hand what skill to lead with on that in Shadowrun.  I suppose depending on the details it could be con, negotiate, or potentially even intimidate?  I do find the selection of social skills in SR clunky at times but I suppose constraint breeds creativity?

Seduction is a specialization of Con in this game, but I don't agree they're tied to the same concept.  There is a distinction between an outright con-job and a seduction, which need not really be an enticement of a romantic nature.  Both require different kinds of approaches, and people, being creatures of habits, will use what they're good at.  Just because a man is good at seducing women doesn't mean he's Count Victor Lustig, ready to sell the Eiffel Tower (which he did twice to scrap iron dealers). 

Maybe all these skills can be narrowed down to one big skill called Persuasion?  After all, that's what you're doing when you're negotiating, intimidating, conning or seducing.  Those just happen to be specializations. 

[Glyph]

I will echo what the others have said - social skills should have hard limits.  There needs to be some avenue to exploit, and it shouldn't be able to overcome inflexible procedures or strong loyalties.  For the latter, the face needs to take an oblique approach, like the example of not being able to waltz past a guard, but being able to lure the guard to a "date" where he can be ambushed for his access card.

With high dice pools, there is a temptation to let large numbers of successes go over the logical limits of social skills.  I would recommend, instead, that high successes let you succeed to a higher degree within those limits (the secretary doesn't double-check your bogus credentials for a few hours, etc.).  Social skills should be subtle manipulations, not a magic bullet.  Even James Bond, or Miles Vorkosigan, occasionally ran into NPCs who could not be influenced by them.  Also, be very careful about social skills used on other PCs, which can be a real minefield.  Note that the book says "Dice rarely need to get involved when characters need to solve problems between one another."

On the flip side, I like the OP's attitude that high social skills should still be useful, just not completely dominating.  I would recommend that faces, while not able to fast-talk their way past everything, should still have about the same level of slack as movie characters.  Like in the Beverly Hills Cop movie, where Eddie Murphy's character bluffs his way into a posh hotel.  It was a fun scene, but it would not work in real life, where hotel managers were not born yesterday.

[witchdoctor]

I will echo what the others have said - social skills should have hard limits.  There needs to be some avenue to exploit, and it shouldn't be able to overcome inflexible procedures or strong loyalties.  For the latter, the face needs to take an oblique approach, like the example of not being able to waltz past a guard, but being able to lure the guard to a "date" where he can be ambushed for his access card.

With high dice pools, there is a temptation to let large numbers of successes go over the logical limits of social skills.  I would recommend, instead, that high successes let you succeed to a higher degree within those limits (the secretary doesn't double-check your bogus credentials for a few hours, etc.).  Social skills should be subtle manipulations, not a magic bullet.  Even James Bond, or Miles Vorkosigan, occasionally ran into NPCs who could not be influenced by them.  Also, be very careful about social skills used on other PCs, which can be a real minefield.  Note that the book says "Dice rarely need to get involved when characters need to solve problems between one another."

On the flip side, I like the OP's attitude that high social skills should still be useful, just not completely dominating.  I would recommend that faces, while not able to fast-talk their way past everything, should still have about the same level of slack as movie characters.  Like in the Beverly Hills Cop movie, where Eddie Murphy's character bluffs his way into a posh hotel.  It was a fun scene, but it would not work in real life, where hotel managers were not born yesterday.

What are you suggesting? That wage slaves don't have their brains surgically removed upon being hired? Now you're just pushing the limits of my suspension of disbelief.