[Fizzygoo]

On a few occasions I've found that the player's need to do some old fashioned, feet-on-the-streets, kind of legwork. Like a target the characters are after is hiding out in gang territory, or they're looking for clues on the activities of a person or persons that lived or lives in an area (especially some hell hole in the Barrens), etc. On the occasions I'm talking about, the "normal legwork" leads the players to these areas, gives them clues as to what the person or persons or McGuffin looks like but since they went off grid the PCs aren't going to find an address with an accompanying Yelp review.

I plan to playtest the following for the next time this occurs (hopefully reach it on the next podcast):

Community Legwork is an Opposed social Extended Test. Players can choose to either use Con, Intimidation, or Negotiations in order to get information and clues out of the locals of a given community (like Tarislar or Touristville). The information and clues are up to the GM to decide and can go from "you should talk to Robert the Know-it-All on Spruce street, he will probably know if anyone's been smuggling in exotic pets here" to "Oh yeah, the guy you're looking for lives at 1721 Evergreen Place, he's usually home after 7 PM" or anything in between.

Each player can choose which skill to use (Con, Intimidation, or Negotiations). The GM sets the time interval, threshold, and the opposition dice for each skill used as it fits the scenario. The GM also sets a threshold for the opposition's rolls, such that when a number of hits (not net hits) are reached certain events are triggered (much like Overwatch Score in the Matrix).

So, for example, the PCs (and the skills they are going to use) are Tusk (Intimidation), Velma (Negotiations), Corkscrew (Con), Oliver (Negotiations), and Pusher (Con). Velma and Oliver are going to use Teamwork, while the rest are spreading out and going on their own.

The GM sets the Community Legwork tests up as follows

Con + Charisma (8, 1 hour) vs. 6 Dice (11)
Intimidation + Charisma (7, 1 hour) vs. 6 Dice ( 8 )
Negotiations + Charisma (8, 1 hour) vs. 6 Dice (10)

The community is largely prejudiced against non Orks/Trolls so everyone except Tusk gets the -2 Social Modifier to their rolls, and the PCs have never been here before so they don't get any Street Cred dice. 

The GM sets the consequences for the community reaching their thresholds first as follows

Con: If the community gets 11 hits, then word has spread that the PCs are taking advantage of the locals (in a way that fits how the PCs describe it). All PCs have a -2 modifier to their Community Legwork tests for the remainder of the time.
Intimidation: If the community gets 8 hits, then local "protection" shows up to try and muscle the PCs out of their turf.
Negotiations: If the community gets 10 hits, then the runners have over extended themselves and find they need to help some of the locals deal with an issue that's "right up the PC's skill-set alley."

The GM can set what ever information is gleaned when the PCs hit their thresholds, making it specific to the type of skill used or the same info is gained regardless of which skill was used to get there.

Obviously in a group with only one character that has any of those social skills, this becomes less dynamic and is intended for the whole group to be able to take part in legwork that culminates to a major plot point.

The big mechanics unknown is where, in general, to set the PC's thresholds and the community's thresholds (or even to set staged thresholds, so like, for Intimidation, when the community reaches 5 hits, 10 hits, 15 hits, etc. then the intimidating PC(s) end up in a fight), all of which largely depends on the PC's skill ratings. And if the community threshold is reached then that shouldn't be a full-stop mission-block.

[Kiirnodel]

I really like the concept, and in fact I've done something roughly similar, although I used a much less complex system.

I do think you may have added a level of complication that isn't really necessary. We can use the thresholds and settings that are already available. SR5 already has a chart of suggested thresholds based on difficulty of a task. These thresholds are based on unopposed skill tests, and in fact the entire extended test system isn't written to include opposed tests.

Rather than needing to come up with more numbers by adding an opposed die pool, it would be easier to just use the normal extended test rules. Rather than having the community have some sort of effect on the opposing die pool, you can simply use the social modifiers table to determine modifiers to the acting character's die pool and potentially change the threshold needed for the extended test (as per the normal chart for extended tests).

So, for example, if a character is asking around a neighborhood about something. Check the social modifiers table for appropriate modifiers, such as the neighborhood's predisposition toward the character and the risk of revealing the information they desire. Then double check modifiers based on the method they are using, like modifiers for intimidation based on physical threats or having obvious weaponry. Finally determine the threshold based on how hard it is to find the information.


Using normal extended test rules also freea up the GM from needing to roll the opposed die pool, allowing you to have several characters potentially rolling this kind of method simultaneously.

[Fizzygoo]

Thanks for the response, Kiirnodel.

I'm still fleshing out the idea and based on your response I should clarify.

I like using standard Extended Tests with social skills (using the Social Modifiers as described on the table of the same name in the SR5 Corebook) to perform "asking around the neighborhood" legwork. This is my starting based for moving forward.

What I want is a metric (above random GM deciding to throw a monkey wrench in at an arbitrary time) for bringing about consequences to the PCs "asking around" over an extended time frame.

The community could perform a tandem roll/test (either as an opposed roll to the PCs social skill test or as a separate roll that happens each time a PC makes an Extended Test roll) with its own threshold. Once that threshold is hit, events happen.

Where, as you wrote, Kiirnodel, that "it would be easier to just use the normal extended test rules" is true, I agree...it doesn't address my desire to have a metric to determine community reactions to being conned/intimidated/negotiated with over the time frame of the Extended Test.

Using just a standard Extended test; The PCs take the time until they hit the threshold to get the information. Aside from the possibility of glitches and the time it takes (which may or may not matter for any given run), there's no consequences. Almost easier to just see how many hits the PCs can buy per roll and determine the time to hit the threshold that way so the GM can say, "You ask around for X hours and this is what you find out..." All of which is a great simple quick and easy option for when the GM wants to move things that way.

But in having this other option, even if the PCs don't have a mission-set timeline to get things done, they will be aware that the GM is making rolls and if they, the PCs, don't get the info fast enough then word can get out to local power-players (Mafia guys, the Toxic Shaman street preacher, rival gangs, etc.), they can piss off locals, or make locals come to them for help, or any other kind of distraction (good or ill) from their original goals.

But I do agree that it is probably best to keep the Extended Test as just that and not roll it in with Opposed Test rules for simplicity's sake.

So to revamp:

For each roll on the Social skill Extended Test that the PCs make, the community rolls matching Extended Tests of their own, which are matched to the Social skill used (Con, Intimidation, Negotiation). When the community hits their threshold(s) then events are triggered that are appropriate for the Social skill on which it triggers.

[Chaos Monkey]

An intriguing proposition.  I would also look into fleshing out an "unintended side-effects" mechanic tied to the choice of skill(s) used, especially where just one skill gets used far and away more than the others.  Something that might encourage using a mix of approaches that can bring in other members of the crew, since Faces are likely the only ones with significant levels of social skills other than Intimidate.

Something that could model the following:

1. [Intimidation] The runners have been bullying their way through the community, asking questions, and asking them pretty hard - and now everyone in the 'hood knows it.  Anyone who sees them coming will either book it fast, or pull a gun.  And if you're really unlucky, the local gang is now actively starting to hunt the runners!  Then again, maybe a few people are pretty happy that the runners pulled out Orky McGangerface's tusks yesterday, and are feeling inclined to offer some help.  Either way, expect something violent to come your way chummers!

2. [Negotiation]  Greasing the right palms is always a great way to get what you want, except the word's out now:  "These chummers are paying good nuyen for anything about [subject]!".  The good news is that more and more people might be inclined to approach the runners with information.  The bad news is that now they know you have money, so now the prices are bound to go up on just about everything (Damn inflation! Stop flooding the local economy!). The quality of the information up for sale is likely going to decline (the local grifters would have to turn in their Union cards if they didn't try to sell you a bill of goods...).  And then there's the fact that the local gangers are likely to jump you for those fat credsticks/wads of script that they know you have.  Ah well, you know how the road to hell got paved right?

3. [Con]  Well, the longer you run any con, the more likely the house of cards you're building is likely to fall in.  Better hope that Jimmy the Blade doesn't have a talk with "Two Guns" Timmy about that great deal you made before you find what you're after, or you'll be seeing precisely where they got their nicknames real soon!  Clock's ticking!  Have fun juggling that increasingly intricate pack of lies!

Also, I'd argue that you could also use Etiquette.  It's amazing how much you can learn by shutting your mouth, opening your ears, and just blending in.  You're bound to overhear or otherwise witness something useful, of course it's not a great option if time is a factor.

[Fizzygoo]

Pretty much exactly that, Chaos Monkey.

"Something that might encourage using a mix of approaches that can bring in other members of the crew..." Yeah, I wanted something that gives another option for using social skills in a broader context that would give additional incentive for players pick up one or more of those skills while rewarding players that put a solid amount of karma into them (as the higher the skill the faster they get to the info they need with less of chance of an event happening).

I think your examples are perfect! I'm hesitant of fleshing out anything more concrete save for specific legwork scenarios since the community itself is likely to dictate what happens (using Intimidation in Helloweener's turf vs. using it going door-to-door in an upscale suburban neighborhood for example).

Etiquette...I go back and forth. I'd prefer to use it as an initial role, for when the characters start their community legwork, and do the Etiquette + Charisma [Social] Test vs. a community Perception + Charisma with 3 hits shifting their attitude towards the PC up (as per SR5 pg 141) and then that affecting the community legwork tests. But you make a good point about blending in and listening allowing you to find out things.

[witchdoctor]

I have to admit that the idea has a lot of appeal to me, it can add a lot of depth but I don't think we want to get too complicated here, KISS (the concept not the hairmetal band) comes to mind. I would feel having an opposed test would be just fine and then the consequences could result from what the skill used by the players to make the skill check.

[Kiirnodel]

I definitely like the idea, and Chaos Monkey's suggestions for extra effects are great too. The only part I think needs work is how to handle the opposition. As I mentioned before, using an opposed die pool may not be the best option, as that implies that the community is actively trying to not be "leg-worked." Some people may not like being pushed around (Intimidated) or they might realize that a story is made up (Con), but the Legwork system isn't usually an opposed test in the first place, either you get the information or you don't.

But I do agree that having interesting effects happen if the runners take too long or go about things the wrong way does add an interesting aspect to the game. You could have a community roll a parallel social test, but I feel like trying to create an appropriate social die pool for a community is somewhat arbitrary. You could potentially use a die pool of an appropriate leader for a social group, but even that isn't really accurate for how a group test like that would work.

Maybe, instead we could take a page from the Matrix playbook. Overwatch Score increases over time as the little pieces of data that a Hacker leaves behind is tallied up and the Grid Overwatch tracks them down. To simulate this creeping up of the OS, the GM is supposed to roll 2d6, adding the total on the dice to the Score and once it hits 40 things happen. A similar method could be used here. It would take some testing, but each time the runners make a social test to get information you roll a couple of dice and tally up the totals. Once the total reaches a certain amount, the event/result of the social test occurs. This would simplify the rolls for the GM, and still get us our random event chance.

This would take some testing, but I can make a quick suggestion for a basis for this roll.

• For starters, we could take the cue from Matrix and make the Event number 40, and the base dice for each interval 2d6. I think an interval of 10 minutes is probably a good middle ground for a social test, but feel free to suggest a different amount of time.
• To make things different between the types of tests, you would probably want to make it so that the different social skills create effects at different rates. Making the Event number higher or lower allows you to manipulate how soon the group triggers something. If a community is touchy about threats, maybe they trigger a response at 30 instead for Intimidation. Maybe the neighborhood knows better than to mouth off about getting paid to talk, so Negotiation and bribing people takes until 45 before word finally gets out.
• You could also change how different neighborhoods react by changing how many dice are rolled each time. Larger neighborhoods where people are spread out and don't inter-communicate as much might only roll 1 die each interval. While small communities where everyone knows everyone might roll 3d6 each time to simulate how news travels fast.
• Glitches on the social test could cause an immediate extra roll to increase the score (or just an extra 2d6 depending on the options used).
• Critical Glitches cause the overall test to immediately fail (as per extended test rules) and triggers the event immediately.

Other options to try out to change things up:

• Add an additional flat amount each time instead of more/less dice (Every roll is 2d6 + 5, for example).
• The runner's results affect the roll somewhat. If you want to simulate the idea that big hits make big waves, add half (or even all) of the hits on the runner's test to the creeping score each time. Or if the runners are paying people to keep their mouths shut and covering their bases do the opposite, have the hits reduce the score (I would probably recommend this only if you are also adding a flat extra amount each time).

[Fizzygoo]

KISS (the concept not the hairmetal band) comes to mind.

Exactly. Long run this may prove to be to cumbersome in which case it isn't worth it.

1st playtest results:

I gave the players the basic info for how this would go down which, to paraphrase and clean up, was along the lines of:

"Using any of the three skills for an Extended Test, you can stay as a group and start asking around or you can split up and go in teams or individually to cover more ground. Everyone's hits go towards the skill-related threshold. The more of you making rolls, the faster you'll get the information. The longer it takes the greater chance of events happening in response to your asking around, which is represented by community's Extended Test that happens at each time interval for each of the three skills (if the skill is used)."

I described the three skills and the general possibilities of events that may arise from using each. The players decided to split up into three groups; Elven Shaman (Negotiation, and see below) and Elven gunslinger adept (just protection) in one group. Human technomancer (Negotiation) and Ork street sam (just protection, but see below) in another group. And the group's magician (Negotiation and see below), run as an NPC, in the third group. 

The shaman, street samurai, and magician used Etiquette before setting out. The shaman got 4 hits, the street samurai 2, and the magician 1. The base setting for the community's social mod was prejudiced (-2 dice) to outsiders/non-orks-trolls or neutral (+0) to outsider orks-trolls. Since the shaman got over 3 hits, she raised her group from prejudiced to neutral. With one hit more more the other two groups didn't make it better...but didn't make it worse.

Since they were all using Negotiations it made it easy to keep track of (as well as showing that there's great motivation on the players' part to all use the same skill, especially Negotiation, which means the thresholds to get info should be much lower for using Con and Intimidation [faster payout for greater risk]).

The Technomancer throws me a curve ball (like any good player should) at tells me that before they set out he wants to hire a couple locals to help them. They already met a kid on the way out to the location through the role playing so they use him and a couple of friends (after a Negotiations test and an exchange of nuyen). Because they have guides now, I give each group +3 dice for their community Extended Tests.

I initially set the PC's Negotiation threshold, time interval at 12, 1 hour. For the community I used 6 Dice (to count hits) with a threshold of 5. But changed it so that at 5, 10, 15, etc. events would happen at greater 'weight' as each higher tier was reached. I didn't write up any actual events for this as I wanted to play it by ear and use it as an indicator for when a "random encounter" would happen.

First hour roll comes along and the PCs get 13 hits, the community 3. So immediately I see I set the PC threshold too low...as without this system I was planning on this taking a few hours minimum. So I just crossed out the 12 I wrote down and wrote 24 with a note that I need to work out how to deal with thresholds, especially if they go solo or if they go in groups.

Second hour; PCs get 9 more hits (22 total), and the community gets 7. So here I have the elves get attacked by a crammed-up young ork who's pissed to see some elves poking around. The gunslinger adept evades the ork's spiked 2x4 pretty easily and then kicks the ork a couple of times in the face, leaving him unconscious in the dirt. Also, since the PCs are getting so close to the (new) threshold, I have the people they encounter here "know some people who might know what they're looking for" and point them in that direction.

Third hour, PCs get 8 more hits (30 total, over threshold), and the community only gets 2 (9 total). So the PCs meet the NPCs with the info they need, interact with them on an individual (normal, not community) basis and with that succeeding they got the info they need to move on.

And through the rolls for each hour I'm describing the setting, general interactions, etc., and letting the players interject with ideas and additional things they wanted to do while there.

The "notes"

So the "overwatch score" path sounds good, Kiirnodel. By having multiple "thresholds" (sorry, can't think of a term yet for the tiered thresholds on the community's side) and just an accumulative XD6 roll for the community it simplifies it quite a bit. The GM can set a modifier to the D6 if they feel it's warranted.

Also, after play testing it, I think it's not a bad idea to set one threshold that all of the players are adding to, whether they use Con, Intimidation, or Negotiation. And for each player using Con give the community a +1 (so there about) to their D6 rolls, and a +2 (or so) for those using Intimidation. I'd prefer to have the three skills separated but only to help dictate the kind of reactions from the community, however it streamlines this system to roll them into one Extended Test (and greatly reduces the complexity of it all), and it's easy enough for the GM to decide, based on what skills the group are using, how the community reacts (and to which group).

So if we go after modeling based on Matrix OS, then I think a "standard" community roll of 2D6 is good (and can be adjusted based on size and interconnections, like you say Kiirnodel), with a tier between 10 to 15, which would depend on the community. 10 means they're more volatile (chance of hitting an event in the first interval), 15 if they're a more 'docile' community (as with no other modifiers to the roll it would take at least the second Extended Test interval for something to happen). Again, this becomes tiered, so if the base is 11 for the community, then at 11, 22, 33, etc., events are triggered with the nature of the events becoming more severe the higher it gets.

The nice thing here, is the Extended Test interval can be set according to the size of the "community," something like

1 hour: local neighborhood (several city blocks in size)
30 minutes: shopping mall, small business district, etc. (about a city block)
10 minutes: busy BTL den, etc. (a small apartment complex)

I like the glitch/critical glitch results you have, Kiirnodel as well as the options, especially the paying to keep people's mouths shut to add a negative modifier to the community's roll. And something like for every 3 hits on each individual player's roll, 1 is added to the community score.

So now for the players' threshold. The way it should play out is if the more players going on their own, spreading out, to get info, the short time it should take to get the info. [21.3 MP deleted by Fizzygoo] I'm over thinking here. Using the base descriptions of the Extended Test thresholds on SR5 pg 48 works and makes sense.

tl;dr

After reading the comments and having one play testing session, revising to:

When characters need to find information but lack the contacts with the knowledge, they can make a Community Legwork Extended Test. This represents the characters going into a neighborhood, communal area, or even a busy bar to subtly ask around. Characters can choose to use Con, Intimidation, and/or Negotiation for the test and the more characters that spread out to do so, the faster they can, hopefully, find the information they're looking for. Once they've hit the threshold, as determined by the GM, they've found what they needed (often in being introduced to the right person or group who will have their own terms and conditions for giving up the information).

Asking around is not without its dangers though, each interval for which the characters make their rolls, the community rolls 2D6 (plus any modifiers set by the GM) and adds the result to the Community Overwatch Score. The community has a COS Tier, usually between 10 to 15 as set by the GM. Every time the COS hits a tier, and event occurs. So if the Tier is set at 12, then when the COS hits 12, 24, 36, etc., and event happens.

Events are the results of news of the character's questioning reaching interested parties, which can run from the local gang to law enforcement to the family down the street thinking the PCs can, or should, help them out. The nature of the event is largely determined by what social skills the PCs use, using Con and Intimidation can lead to making enemies, while using Negotiation can lead to unexpected out of pocket expenses or even agreeing to work a side job.

[Reaver]

Very interesting all.

But yea, I can see where this could get cumbersome if you have a group that isn't into the legwork part of things.

I use a more liberal version of contacts when my groups are more action and less 'legworky' (want to say less roleplay, but that would be inaccurate)

I look at their connection rating as a sort of 'pull factor' within their niche. So having a bartender contact with a connection rating of 5 means he has the ear if a large number of other bartenders in the city..... if he is willing to put this web of bartenders to task, 'looking for some guy' or 'something' depends on the loyalty of the contact...


I find that this way, generally an entire party can cover a vast city and all its little cliche and niches rather fast, and get what they are looking for quickly to keep things moving fast enough to keep the Dice Monsters happy