Making Social Encounters Work

[Hal]

My group has only had two sessions so far, so perhaps this is just an consequence of inexperience, but I found running a social encounter to be somewhat difficult. 

The problem seems to be two-fold:  First, most of my players took moderate-to-low scores in social stats.  Understandable (you can't do it all), but it means that most of their social "attacks" go nowhere.  From a mechanical standpoint, they'd have trouble convincing their own mothers to open the door for them.

The other part of the problem is more in execution.  We stayed in-character for the social encounter, but it was difficult to both think of it as an encounter, where you would want to make viable attacks, and approach it like an actual social situation.  Coherent conversation started becoming difficult when certain "attacks" either failed or backfired.

Not taking full advantage of the system probably played at least some part to this.  Nobody tried to pull any social maneuvers, for example, to earn some tags to make things easier.  But it still felt awkward and contrived at times.  Has anyone else had this difficulty?  And how did you resolve it?

[DFJunkie]

I GM DFRPG too, and I have had similar problems. 

The first thing I did was remind the PCs that they can, and should use maneuvers.  Also declarations.  Fortunately one of my characters is a social monster and the other two were more than happy to pass her tags rather than try to take shots themselves.

The second thing, and this might not work for your group, is to remember that social combat can be every bit as abstract as physical combat.  We've found that the best way to handle it is to start with actual conversation but if it eventually moves into "I'm using False Face to try to give him the impression that I'm less reasonable than I am by glowering and making veiled threats" that's fine.  None of my players has a Deception of Superb in real life. 

Third, keep in mind what the NPCs are going for, essentially what Taken Out condition they'll want to impose on your PCs if they win, and what the PCs have to gain from victory.  It's helped me structure the dialogue for the NPCs and figure out when to start talking concession.

Finally, don't be afraid to over act.  I am not an actor, so to make NPCs memorable I tend to overdo their more obvious characteristics.  If you can pull off subtle, great, go for it, but I've found that the unsubtle NPCs are the ones that stick with them.  They just love Marcel Raith (think Pepé Le Pew), and literally demanded that he make repeat appearances. 

[wednesdayboy]

If you can pull off subtle, great, go for it, but I've found that the unsubtle NPCs are the ones that stick with them.

I think that's a very good point for roleplaying in general.  It's easy for someone on either side of the screen to have their characters be so subtle that their personality or intent gets missed by the others at the table.  I wouldn't go so far as caricature or farce but you shouldn't be so subtle that no one is picking up what you're dropping.

And that probably impacts social encounters as well.  If your character makes a very subtle inference that everyone misses you wouldn't know it should be a social attack.

[EldritchFire]

...The first thing I did was remind the PCs that they can, and should use maneuvers.  Also declarations...

This. If you're not adept at making the "direct" assault on their social track, you must "lead up" to it. Beat around the bush for a few rounds. Build up two or three maneouvres. Then make the attack with a hefty +6 bonus. *drool*

It's just like the verbal fencing you see in Law & Order.

-EF

[Aminar]

In all honesty in six sessions I have never used an actual social encounter.  They have happened, but the players are the style that role-play and I judge based on that instead of the actual rolls.  Rolling distracts from role-playing so for social I just play it by ear.  If they manage I give in, if they don't they suffer.

Like when they woke up an Irish priest at 3 AM to get a look at a crime scene.  They didn't get their look.  When the lycanthrope goes to the Skavis club owner and asks for help he usually ends up feeding her a bit and getting what he wants, further addicting him to the woman that makes him feel all better.(Smart Skavis feed by making the person depressed and being the solution to that depression, like smart Raith's don't kill.)

[DFJunkie]

Aminar, the only downside of your approach is that it seems to invalidate the social skills.  A particularly loquacious player with shitty deceit and rapport can still out-socialize a less adept player who invested points.  I'm not saying that it's a bad way to play, if you and your group like it more power to you.  On the other hand, if your less adept player says "I want to make him believe X," having him roll Deceit is not a role playing failure. 

[devonapple]

Another option is to keep the social conflicts, let the players lose and let them take Concessions. They get Fate Points that way, and when they grow tired of losing social conflicts, the players may opt to shift their skills around when you give them an appropriate Milestone.

But building up Maneuvers is a good equalizer.

[EldritchFire]

Aminar, the only downside of your approach is that it seems to invalidate the social skills.  A particularly loquacious player with shitty deceit and rapport can still out-socialize a less adept player who invested points.  I'm not saying that it's a bad way to play, if you and your group like it more power to you.  On the other hand, if your less adept player says "I want to make him believe X," having him roll Deceit is not a role playing failure. 

I'd like to echo this. I actually went and blogged about it once.

In my opinion, game mechanics are a pretty good equalizer. But, Aminar, keep going if it works for you!

-EF

[Sanctaphrax]

I don't think that full social conflicts are necessary most of the time. A single skill roll or a bit of narration is usually enough to simulate an average interaction.

And yes, maneuvers are basically mandatory if you don't completely own your opponents.

PS: This general topic has been discussed before. In case you're interested, here's a link: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,22927.30.html
PPS: You can probably find good examples of social combat on the Play-by-Post board.
PPPS: crusher_bob wrote a detailed example of social combat. It's here: http://dresden-sanfran.wikidot.com/sample-social-conflict

[Bruce Coulson]

Not a problem per se, but with a group of good role-players often the social situations play themselves out in my games without a lot of rolls.  The non-social characters either absent themselves or blunder about, while the social characters are charming.  (The wizard settles for being straighforward and without guile.)

In the next session, they're going to be dealing with a potential civil war within the local White Court, so I expect there will be a LOT more social combat.