A bit frustrated

[sinker]

I get what you guys are saying, and again I don't think we need wizards to be slinging attacks in a social conflict. I just think that there's just as much justification to call it an attack as there is to call it a maneuver. Seems to me that everyone's trying to justify shutting a player with this kind of idea down, whereas my school of thought is why not simply tell them the truth. There is plenty of justification, and nothing in the RAW that says no, but we generally don't because it's massively unbalanced.

[noclue]

Seems to me that everyone's trying to justify shutting a player with this kind of idea down, whereas my school of thought is why not simply tell them the truth. There is plenty of justification, and nothing in the RAW that says no, but we generally don't because it's massively unbalanced.

Cuz I'm honestly interested in this discussion and not 100% sure of my response.

[Kerberos]

I get what you guys are saying, and again I don't think we need wizards to be slinging attacks in a social conflict. I just think that there's just as much justification to call it an attack as there is to call it a maneuver. Seems to me that everyone's trying to justify shutting a player with this kind of idea down, whereas my school of thought is why not simply tell them the truth. There is plenty of justification, and nothing in the RAW that says no, but we generally don't because it's massively unbalanced.

That might be what you think is the truth, but I certainly don't agree. Granted the rules do not explicitly forbid making social attacks, but they don't explicitly permit it either and they do explicitly forbid invading the mind of another. Allowing social attacks don't just create game imbalance, it also creates huge consistency issues in the game world. If you can mindfuck people without breaking the laws of magic, why isn't it being done on a much grander scale?

If memory serves we've seen very few examples of mind altering magic. Most have been lawbreaking and those that wasn't, such as the love potion, has been identified as borderline lawbreaking, have been thaumaturgical and can easily be accounted for as a maneuver rather than an attack. Even when talking about maneuvers I honestly can't think of a single example of non-lawbreaking magic being used in a social conflict, can you? If not then I don't see how you think it's a stretch maintained solely for game-balance that magic is not that useful in social conflicts.

[sinker]

That might be what you think is the truth, but I certainly don't agree. Granted the rules do not explicitly forbid making social attacks, but they don't explicitly permit it either and they do explicitly forbid invading the mind of another. Allowing social attacks don't just create game imbalance, it also creates huge consistency issues in the game world. If you can mindfuck people without breaking the laws of magic, why isn't it being done on a much grander scale?

If memory serves we've seen very few examples of mind altering magic. Most have been lawbreaking and those that wasn't, such as the love potion, has been identified as borderline lawbreaking, have been thaumaturgical and can easily be accounted for as a maneuver rather than an attack. Even when talking about maneuvers I honestly can't think of a single example of non-lawbreaking magic being used in a social conflict, can you? If not then I don't see how you think it's a stretch maintained solely for game-balance that magic is not that useful in social conflicts.

Ok, normally I am much more evenly tempered, however this is just irritating me. I have never, ever suggested that mind magic would not be against the laws. I have never, ever suggested that one could deal mental stress without breaking the laws. Social stress and mental stress are two different things. To create social stress one does not need to manipulate the target at all (one never controls how someone responds to social attacks) one needs to manipulate the situation. Belial made a pretty huge list of social magic not two pages back and for the last five or six posts I have been talking about one specific method of social magic none of which is mind magic. Perhaps you should read the posts before you respond to them.

Ok... Deep breath.... Sorry, I'm better now.

Cuz I'm honestly interested in this discussion and not 100% sure of my response.

Ok, I was trying not to argue because it seemed like everyone had a set opinion, but if you'd like to be swayed here goes.

I'll start with whether something is an attack or a maneuver. I'll admit that I could see any of these magics as working for either, but it would primarily have to do with intent and circumstance. If you are trying to put someone off balance so that someone else can really get a good solid dig at them then a maneuver makes complete sense. If however your intent is to dive them off in a huff or make them flee from embarrassment then an attack seems more appropriate. Another thing to consider is how the person would look in the situation. If it's at a stuffy social club and the target is likely to be remembered for months as the guy who lost his pants and then ran off crying then that's totally consequences taken as the result of an attack. If you're in a more casual or less public setting I'd go for a maneuver as it might be distracting but not necessarily damaging to the target's reputation.

1) To keep beating the subtlety hose: Can you actually depants someone with evocation? Increase the gravitational pull on their pant without increasing it on anything else? Bear in mind that unless they're wearing sweatpants you might not be able to pull their pants down without unbuckling their belt and unbuttoning the pants (or ribbing them).

I can think of two methods without even really thinking about it. Water magic to corrode the metal (and only the metal) of the buckles and clasps makes plenty of sense as does earth magic to tear the metal (and only the metal) away or effect it in other ways. On top of that there are many other things one could do other than pantsing someone as pointed out earlier.

3) Magic generally involves pseudo-latin or gestures. You start chanting pseudo-latin and gesturing weirdly at someone you're having an argument with and their pants fall of and anyone even slightly magic-savvy will do the math. Even someone non-savvy would probably figure it out even if they rationalized it as some kind of trickery. That means that you could easily face the same kind of social consequences from a magical depantsing as from a physical one.

Just because it involves phrases or gestures does not mean that you have to yell them at the top of your lungs or wave your hands around conspicuously. One could mumble or whisper what you wanted and get the job done just as easily. One could gesture under a table or simply twitch while the hand is laying somewhere. Hell I talk with my hands a lot, does that mean that people should start accusing me of witchcraft?

My final thoughts have to do with the earlier statement here.

Granted the rules do not explicitly forbid making social attacks, but they don't explicitly permit it either

A while ago Fred expressed his thoughts on this kind of thing. He said that while everything isn't expressly stated in the books, he desire is that people would take what is there and extrapolate it. Assume that what works in one situation would work in another similar situation, provided that there is justification. When we get to the section on social conflict it doesn't discuss every action the player can take, what it says is that social conflict works like physical conflict, only with a social skin. That mechanically they have the same workings. So why would you assume that a broad tool, that works in physical conflict wouldn't work in social conflict provided that the justification was there?

Finally I would like to point out that were someone were to run a 4th lawbreaker (as I have before) what would stop them from simply using their mind magic in a social situation?

[Taran]

I see a 30 shift social attack by thaumaturgy as more than a de-pantsing.  It's a minor entropy curse that starts wearing a person down during the day with little mis-haps here and there to "throw them off their game".  As it reaches its peak, the stars align and the target is put in a position for maximal embarrasment, maybe in front of peers in a formal setting, in front of that girl he's trying to court etc...and THAT's when he loses his pants.

I'm probably being thick, but why can't you do an social attack that DOESN'T affect a persons mind.  I see a rapport attack as knowing just the right thing to say at just the right time.  Why can't magic give you that moment of inspiration to say the right thing at the right time?  I don't see evocation as being able to do that kind of thing and maybe, as stated before, you could use Thaumaturgy to give you lots of aspects to tag for a rapport attack...and maybe that's the only way of doing that kind of thing.

[BumblingBear]

Since this is such a contested issue and is a discussion about a fairly simple rules issue, has anyone asked Fred about it?

I know he doesn't like to give an official word on stuff like this, but we could ask him how he would run it at his table.

Otherwise continuing to argue is just going in circles.

[evileeyore]

I can think of two methods without even really thinking about it. Water magic to corrode the metal (and only the metal) of the buckles and clasps makes plenty of sense as does earth magic to tear the metal (and only the metal) away or effect it in other ways. On top of that there are many other things one could do other than pantsing someone as pointed out earlier.

Finely focused Entropic ritual aimed at unraveling the pants, further uses of Entropomancy could be in the lead up adding taggable aspects to the final attack, so it isn't just "His pants falls down for a 30 shift Social attack" but a "30 shifts worth of his life has been falling apart tagged Aspects Social Attack".

A very subtle and patient Warlock could really ruin the hell out of someone's life without even really ever attacking them directly.


[EDIT]
I see Taran responded while I was reading and typing.  I agree with his assessment as well.  A skilled curse would suck the life right out of your day.
[/EDIT]

Hell I talk with my hands a lot, does that mean that people should start accusing me of witchcraft?

If you have the weight of a duck...

Finally I would like to point out that were someone were to run a 4th lawbreaker (as I have before) what would stop them from simply using their mind magic in a social situation?

Nothing.  Hell it'd be fast and easy to simply flood their mind with trauma, visions, voices, or feelings.

[sinker]

Another brilliant non-mind magic social attack occurred to me as I began to drift off last night. Air can be used to manipulate sounds, how about having an argument that only the target can hear. Now he's talking at you for some reason. If you can upset him then maybe he begins yelling at you while you stand there and look confused. Better yet get him to yell at someone else or create a directed illusion with spirit by aiming light at him or veiling yourself from all directions but his. Now he's yelling at nothing. You better believe that having a "psychotic break" (not an actual psychotic break but what everyone else will perceive as such) and yelling for no reason at nothing is going to effect your reputation.

[Richard_Chilton]

Just got caught up on this thread...  And I thinking about one of the spin offs

If a physical attack puts someone in an embarrassing situation, would it also require social maneuver or would it be creating the circumstance for the aspect to exist?

For example - the depantsing spell/attack/maneuver.  Personally I'd see it as a sort of grapple, but let's say someone comes up behind another character and pulls his gym shorts down.

It's a physical action.  Call it a grapple of maneuver or whatever, having Might at Fair or better will matter more than having high social skills.  It ends with the target character's gym shorts down - a physical effect.  Someone else might use a navel gazing maneuver involving Presence, Intimidation, or Rapport to lay the aspect "Your Pants Are Down" or "I See London, I See France" as part of a social attack, or on the next exchange the bully might go "Ha, Ha - your pants were down" as part of a social attack, but pulling down someone's pants is a physical action.

That's not the only Physical bit that could lead to a social tag.  Using a hose, bucket of water, or supersquirter someone could do a physical maneuver and give a girl wet T-Shirt.  You could push someone fully clothed (say in fancy dress) into a pool.  There's hitting someone in the face with a pie.  You could... Well, there are countless physical ways to put someone in an embarrassing situation.  All of them operating off of physical, not social, actions.

Not to say that just because a physical move works the social attack will too.  The cool kid (high social skills) in gym class will turn things around on the bully that pantsed him.  A dignified cold stare could counter the wet T-Shirt.  Some politicians have been pied and turned that around - joking with the press while they still have pie on their face.  In order words the physical move gave someone an aspect to tag but the victim won the social conflict.

Or am I off base here on a play balance issue?

Richard

[noclue]

I'm probably being thick, but why can't you do an social attack that DOESN'T affect a persons mind.  I see a rapport attack as knowing just the right thing to say at just the right time.  Why can't magic give you that moment of inspiration to say the right thing at the right time?  I don't see evocation as being able to do that kind of thing and maybe, as stated before, you could use Thaumaturgy to give you lots of aspects to tag for a rapport attack...and maybe that's the only way of doing that kind of thing.

You can use magic to summon entities to get information, but knowing the right thing to say requires things like intellect and personality. A spell that told you the right thing to say seems very boring to me. Harry has to summon Bob and dig for information, he doesn't just cast a spell and know all the answers. That makes for grabby stories.

[Wolfwood2]

Magic is great at doing maneuvers that can give you taggable Aspects for social conflict.  It's not so great for doing the attack rolls themselves.  I recall a social conflict where my wizard started with an Air/Force Evocation that made the sights and sounds of everything except my character seem murky and far away.  He followed it up with a Soulgaze to grab some Aspects from his opponent, and then used a base Good Intimidation and invoking one of his own Aspects to smack down an experienced mortal politican with a social attack that was at +11 before the roll.

The great part is that the politician didn't really understand we were even in a social conflict before the soulgaze, so he wasn't attacking back while all those set-up maneuvers were going on.

[sinker]

Magic is great at doing maneuvers that can give you taggable Aspects for social conflict.  It's not so great for doing the attack rolls themselves.

I think this is the thing that I can't get over. No one has given me a thematic reason why. Why is it bad at making attack rolls. I mean I understand the mechanical and balance reasons for this, but why is it thematically impossible to anger or upset someone indirectly using magic? If I tell someone a lie to upset them (using deceit to attack) how is that different from showing them an illusion or creating a situation (like pantsing or tripping them) that would upset them? Someone please answer this question for me.

[Kommisar]

Okay, an answer.

It is a matter of causation.  What is directly causing the social stress the target takes?  Is it magic directly or is it an event that is carried out via magic.

Take your example of dropping someone's pants.  In this case, it is the act of the pants dropping in front of others that is causing the social stress regardless as to the exact mechanism by which one uses to bring the pants down.  The use of magic is just a means that could easily be replaced by normal actions for the same result.  In this case, after the pants are down, the individual who is now embarrassed can still attempt to play it off (roll rapport perhaps?) and avoid the stress.  Or, someone can step in and use the moment of the pants falling to lay into the poor guy to add to the stress inflicted.  In both cases, the magic is used as the method by the which the pants are dropped and it is the targets inability to adjust/play it off that causes the stress with the lack of pants being a hindrance to him.  Which is exactly why this is magic being used as a maneuver to a social attack; either to add a +2 to someone's attack or as a compel.

Take the other example of using Air magic to talk to a person such that no one else could hear your words.  Easy enough to accomplish with magic (though it would be debatable as an evocation).  But, really, what is causing the social stress in this instance?  Is it the magic, or that the person is reacting irrationally in front of others?  It is the later.  After all, if you used the same magic to secretly communicate with an ally, your ally would not take social stresses from the conversation.  The Air magic is a means.  It is the carefully chosen words spoken (Empathy Roll perhaps?) designed to evoke a reaction from the target in front of others.  In this case, magic would be a maneuver as well that places an aspect along the lines of "Voices in your Head".

Even the mass Entropy Curse example is simply a giant maneuver (or maneuvers) that takes a toll on a person.  But it does not directly attack his social standing.

This is because of the nebulous nature of one's Social Stress Boxes.  This represents, one can argue, the combination of a characters social standing in society (whatever that society at that moment happens to be) and his own self-image.  In essence, it is about perception.  His perception of himself as well as others perception of him.  And, yes, I'm using a generic "him" pronoun here... could be a her or it.  To attack this, you have to alter perceptions.  You can do this, as is most often, though manipulation.  Or, if you have magic, you can use it to directly alter one's mind and adjust that perception.  BUT, if one goes the direct route, you are certainly breaking a Law of Magic there.  You can still do it... but you are breaking the Law by altering someone's mind. 

The indirect method, though, is to simple create a situation where people perceive something that causes them to change their own mind.  That can be seeing a guy lose his pants; for sure.  But it is the pants dropping that changes their perception and, therefore, inflicts the social stress upon the target... not the magic that caused the pants to come down.


For magic to be the direct cause of social stress means that magic would have to directly inflict stress upon one's social standing.

[evileeyore]

Okay, an answer.

It is a matter of causation.  What is directly causing the social stress the target takes?  Is it magic directly or is it an event that is carried out via magic.

Nice explanation, but it's skipping one glaring fact:

Magic is causation.


Use air magic to shove someone off a building.  They die from the fall, yet somehow your magic is still to blame.

Create a ball of ball (heat) and project it at someone, once launched you have no more control over it than you do a bullet fired from a gun.... however it is still your magic that would cause the death if they were to die.

Thus the same with the 30 shift "depantsing".

[Taran]

I don't think you can compare physical combat with social combat.