Non Combat Systems- spin-off of Women in Glorantha

[HeartQuintessence]

Since my Women in Glorantha thread ranged all over creation (literally), I thought I'd create a place for to talk abou something that got a lot of traction.

Ways to do other interesting things in Runequest Glorantha other than combat, that are more than just simple dice rolls.

[Squaredeal Sten]

The first thing is for the GM to be open to having non-combat actions be significant to the adventure.

Given that - it's probably good not to invent too much in the way of mechanics, not good to just bulk up the rules.  But just as rules about how to handle fighting tend to put fighting in the GMs and players' minds, some advice on how to handle non-combat things is good for actually having non-combat interactions.

Here is one such piece of advice that I appreciate:

Andrew Logan Montgomery proposes a way of handling roleplayed persuasion of individuals , on pp 98-100 of The Company of the Dragon.  This is guidance for methodical GM'ing.  This can obviously also be applied to persuading groups: 

First, establish the NPC's starting resistance on a 6-point scale from Hostile to Enamored. 

Assign Points of Resistance to the points on that scale, he suggests 10 to 0.  Hostile is 10, Neutral is 6, Enamored is 0.

The PC's or PCs' goal is to reduce resistance to 0.  At 0 = enamored, the NPC(s) do what you ask.  If Resistance ever rises to 11+, it's over, the character is not going to be persuaded.

GMs get general advice on pacing;  Use your own judgment and sense of pacing (how many rolls per hour, how many persuasive interactions per session).  Trying to persuade someone to marry you is probably a multi-session thing.

The player(s) have to decide and announce what they are going to do to persuade. 

The GM decides what skill or skills apply to the player character's action(s).  Examples already on the character sheet are charm, bargain, orate, lore, fast talk, intimidate....  Augments can be done. 

Bribery and gift-giving are not covered in ALM's advice.  But considering the gift-giving in the background material, I would personally suggest that the GM assign augment % to the impact of a gift, just as there is a % bonus to worship from various sizes of  sacrifice to a god (RQiG p.316).  Use some judgment here: A big gift to a poor person would be a small gift to a king, so scale the impact according to the target's annual income.    And remember, kings and chiefs may expect a suitable gift when you come to see them, even before you begin to persuade.  And some are greedy, some are not, so giving no gift to a greedy king would be a negative augment.

Anyway, after a little role play the player now rolls vs. that skill%, and the result adds to or subtracts from the target's Resistance: +4 for a fumble, -4 for a critical, other values in between: failure is 0, doesn't move the needle.  A simple success is -1.  A special is -2. 

ALM's advice is that this should be handled a little differently for a bargaining situation where an agreement is being hammered out and "it's about getting the better end of the deal":  In this case both sides will make their series of persuasion rolls.  If one side's Resistance is 8 when the other side reaches 0, then the deal is a disaster for the disadvantaged side (that is, the 8 side didn't make concessions and the 0 side did.) .  If it ends at, for example, 1 and 0 then the agreement is not one-sided.

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Squaredeal Sten
clarity

[simonh]

5 hours ago, HeartQuintessence said:

Ways to do other interesting things in Runequest Glorantha other than combat, that are more than just simple dice rolls.

By simple dice roll, do you mean more than just a single opposed roll?

To be honest when I ran Hero Wars (which I've played much more then HQ), I mostly used simple contests and it was fine. The fact that you get to think about augments and such meant even simple contests often had several stages of dice rolls. That's also pretty standard in RQ as well now it also has augments.

If you want to make contests crunchier, you need to think about how to make the outcome of those multiple dice rolls more consequential. The advantage of a one-roll-resolves-all mechanic is that roll is consequential. In RQ combat every roll matters because they all can have severe consequences. What I found with HW is that most of the rolls in extended contests had no consequences, they didn't individually matter. They were just drudgery on the way to the conclusion.

Edited October 14, 2021 by simonh

[radmonger]

In RQ:G rules as written, there are 4 main resolution systems:

1. skills: D100 roll for success/failure level, with option to augment with other skills, runes or passions.

2. chases: as above, plus use opposed rolls and keep track of relative position over multiple rounds

3. spirit combat: as above, plus the tracking of relative position becomes a formal 'mp' number derived from character, with rolled damage done to it.

4. melee combat: as above, but hp instead of mp, and add hit locations, armour points, strike ranks, specific consequences for location-specific damage, and additional rules for situational skill modifiers and the interaction of pairs of opposing skills (i.e.how dodge is different from parry).

Magic can affect any of those resolution system by modifying any of the numbers involved.

2 is new to RQ:G, and 3 is a step up in detail over the spirit combat systems in previous editions (i.e. a character now has a specific spirit combat damage bonus). Unlike Hero Wars-derived systems, the conflict type should always be clear from the nature of what is going on. For good or bad, it is not really up to GM discretion.

I don't really like the chase system, and the full melee system would very likely seem weird to use for anything else.

But spirit combat seems like it could be generalized to add a level of detail to particularly critical or long-term social conflicts.

What you would need would be:

- a _social points_ (sp) characteristic derived from primarily from CHA

- a _social damage bonus_ derived from CHA and INT.

- a table of how much damage various improvised social weapons (a cutting word, a deadly truth) could do

- another table of what levels of social armour commonly exist.

- rules for recovering sp, and the consequences of your sp reaching zero (an inability to participate in social interactions, perhaps corresponding to formal exile, impoverishment or some similar status)

This ends up pretty similar to the system from Company of the Dragon, but with a bit more RQ-style mechanics, and so perhaps a bit less GM judgement required.

 

 

 

 

[Rodney Dangerduck]

47 minutes ago, simonh said:

In RQ combat every roll matters because they all can have severe consequences.

I disagree overall, from a dramatic perspective.  Obviously there are rare crits to the head that end things.  Often, IMO, in a terribly disappointing manner.  Round 1, Fenrir crits Thor to the head, Ragnarok is over.  Who would watch that movie?

In general, RQ Combat is tense and cinematic because there are many many rolls, and, eventually, some combination of rolls will be important.  For example, just last session, I fumbled a parry and my opponent rolled a special.  That was scary!  But he rolled poorly on damage, hit an arm, and I had up Shield 3 and Prot 4, and, by the grace of Vinga, I lost 4 HP from a 5 HP arm.  If he rolled just a little higher on damage and hit the head or chest, I go down.

Next round his Ally Spirit dismissed the Shield.  Things got tenser...  We both called upon our Devotion <Diety> for Inspiration.  More die rolls, more tension.  Our Ernaldan cast Healing.  Our awakened shadowcat recast Shield on me.  More die rolls, more tension.

This is what I'd like to see in a "non Combat System" - more die rolls, Inspiration and augments, and help from your fellow party members.  Not just "roll your Charm".

I agree with @radmonger that Spirit Combat might be a good baseline.

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Rodney Dangerduck

[French Desperate WindChild]

I imagine things in three ways

1) it is an opposition between 2 or more people (bargain, political debate, participate to the great hunt,  etc..)

2) it is a target (aka I want to create a fabulous object, build an house, go to the top of the mountain, organize a great fest, propose a nice show, ...)

3) it is a competition (run olympic games, ...)  where “stations” are not defined by the competitors (garhound, for example).

 

 

the 1) could follow the spirit fight rules as previously said. The only issue I see (but that my taste and I understand that others feel differently) is we roll, and we roll and we roll.

For me, as for combat rules, it’s boring.

What saves the combat is the output: you can lose your character. But in other cases…

So maybe... follow another rule.

What I see is the success or fail is defined by a score.

This score is the addition of different … stations …

Each station is solved by a roll (with augment or not) or (something more complex if you wish more details). A success gives 1, special 2 crit 5 fail 0, fumble -5 ?

Now what are the stations. If we are in case 3 (  a competition defined by “gloranthan rules”) that’s easy, the GM (or the scenario) defines the rules

If we are in case 1 or 2 I would let each actors / competitors define what are the stations -and sometimes define the output), but the GM defines the number of stations.

This system allows two results : who is the first ? the best score. Who succeed to finish ? the one who get a score greater than the number of stations. Of course a fumble may bring a bad result (maybe deadly)

Some examples:

A smith wants to create a great weapon and to give it to the local king. The GM decides that 3 stations are available. The player wants to improve armor, damage and value.

the smith asks the scholar of the group to study if she can find some secret from legendary weapons. Station 1: roll smithing augmented by the scholar study: succees adds 1 AP, special  maybe reduce enc, crit adds 2AP… fumble, the weapon is broken.

Station 2: The smith works hard to improve damage, just roll smith, maybe with some rune / passion augment.

Station 3: The smith (or the party) investigates the king’s court to know what the king’s passions are. Could be a part of scenario, or just one roll, etc.. Once a result determined, use it as an augment on the third smith roll.

 

 

PC 1 wants to convince the ring to do something. Of course PC2 (or npc) wants something else.

GM determines there will be 3 stations too then ask what will be the arguments proposed by each party.

PC 1 talks about customs and how the ancestors managed the situation. The GM says the ring is traditionalist so says the roll will be with customs, but Orate could augment it.

PC 2 talks about glory and how the enemies of the clan will not try anything against the clan. GM says that the clan has no enemy so decides the roll will be with Orate, augmented by a passion / rune if the player wants, but with a -20% penalty

PC 1 explains that her choice will allow the clan to purchase dogs at lower price. But the ring is very respectful of Yinkin. The GM decides a penalty too

Etc…

The point here is that’s not only about roll, but to get information, allowing pc to prepare the challenge, investigation, social networking, etc.. Then that’s not only the smith or the “politician” who are important in these challenge, but all the party, every one could contribute to the success (or the failure)

 

Of course that's not something to use when pc just want to sell their plunder, but when something important has to be managed

Edited October 14, 2021 by French Desperate WindChild

[jajagappa]

2 hours ago, radmonger said:

In RQ:G rules as written, there are 4 main resolution systems:

This misses two other resolution systems:

• Resistance Table - single roll, but % varies based on comparative values
• Opposed Rolls - this is more than just Chase rules.  Combat is an extended example, but any situation can be one or a series of Opposed Rolls.

2 hours ago, simonh said:

To be honest when I ran Hero Wars (which I've played much more then HQ), I mostly used simple contests and it was fine.

Simple contests in HW/HQ are effectively Opposed Rolls, not the simple single skill roll of RQ.

I use the Opposed Rolls for social situations, and utilize Augments, Bonuses/Penalties to adjust the situation.  For more climactic situations, I would use some variant of the HQG Resolution Points system (much as done in Company of the Dragon).

[Joerg]

Combat as well as spirit combat has that rhythm of active role to affect your opponent, your opponent rolling for a counter, then possibly inflicting some sort of damage to the opponent, and your opponent attempting to do the same to you. Non-combat skills mostly just have a resolution, and possibly an opposed skill rolled,

What is missing is that element of attrition or otherwise damage, but something like that can easily be lifted from QuestWorlds group contests.

Dance-offs or similar challenges - especially in ritual context - would be a way to stage such contests, although there might be people who don't think that sing-offs like in Pitch Perfect are a little too cute for Glorantha. Or perhaps at least Hero Wars era Genertela.

The problem that remains is what to do with encounters that are too hostile for such soft approaches. While running away often is an option, the slowest or worst positioned party member may easily be left behind as an offering for the hostiles. Redshirt day...

[Bill the barbarian]

5 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

The first thing is for the GM to be open to having non-combat actions be significant to the adventure.

Having the players buy in to this is also essential!

 

8 hours ago, HeartQuintessence said:

Ways to do other interesting things in Runequest Glorantha other than combat, that are more than just simple dice rolls.

Cheers!

 

3 hours ago, simonh said:

To be honest when I ran Hero Wars (which I've played much more then HQ), I mostly used simple contests and it was fine. The fact that you get to think about augments and such meant even simple contests often had several stages of dice rolls. That's also pretty standard in RQ as well now it also has augments.

This sounds about correct, the mechanism here is demonstrated in listening vs sneaking and scanning vs hiding.

 

22 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

This misses two other resolution systems:

• Resistance Table - single roll, but % varies based on comparative values
• Opposed Rolls - this is more than just Chase rules.  Combat is an extended example, but any situation can be one or a series of Opposed Rolls.

Correct, I had noticed that, and if you had not mentioned it...

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Bill the barbarian

[g33k]

In that portion of the prior thread mentioned by @HeartQuintessence, somebody mentioned the idea of modeling some interactions directly upon combat.

Take, for example, arguing something before a Clan Ring, or similar group.  You might be trying to negotiate a trade-treaty, or the end of a feud, or whatever.

If there's a "chief" present -- the person who will decide, hopefully with advice from the Ring -- he's like the "20" the head.  Convince him, and it's over.
People who will support him -- however his questions or arguments seem to be tending -- might be the "legs." 
People with their own agenda's (running counter to yours) might be like weapon-bearing arms; answer their issues, and the "arms" are disabled, no longer damaging your cause.
Etc.

Obviously, not every situation will be suitable for this model.  Heck, I'm not even sure THIS one is...  But still (to the degree that the ebb&flow of combat mechanics help raise tension and interest) it's well worth looking at re-purposing the same (or similar) mechanics.

n.b. another user pointed out (in that prior thread) that realistically speaking, such "politicking events" are often settled BEFORE the formal "argue and vote" occasion.  One side will have done better ground-work, convinced people ahead of time, maybe bribed the venal, maybe offered help to the desperate, etc.  They'll have already lined up a the key decision-makers / influencers, and the actual vote is really just a pro-forma affair.  Of course, as @Bill the barbarianpoints out, you need player buy-in that RP'ing through such things is "fun!"

Others point to the Spirit Combat system, rather than melee...  That too has promise!

I too suspect (as others have mentioned) that all-new subsystems should be avoided (for the bloat/creep); unless nothing suitable for repurposing-or-adapting can be found in the existing rules.
 

Edited October 14, 2021 by g33k

[Jeff]

7 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I disagree overall, from a dramatic perspective.  Obviously there are rare crits to the head that end things.  Often, IMO, in a terribly disappointing manner.  Round 1, Fenrir crits Thor to the head, Ragnarok is over.  Who would watch that movie?

As an aside, I would. IMO this is one of the best fight scenes ever and I love it when RQ fights go this way:
 

 

[g33k]

8 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I disagree overall, from a dramatic perspective.  Obviously there are rare crits to the head that end things.  Often, IMO, in a terribly disappointing manner.  Round 1, Fenrir crits Thor to the head, Ragnarok is over.  Who would watch that movie?

01 to the 20 is a thing, it's true.  Depending on tastes, that may even be anticlimactic...
 

8 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

...  In general, RQ Combat is tense and cinematic because there are many many rolls, and, eventually, some combination of rolls will be important.  For example, just last session, I fumbled a parry and my opponent rolled a special.  That was scary!  But he rolled poorly on damage, hit an arm, and I had up Shield 3 and Prot 4, and, by the grace of Vinga, I lost 4 HP from a 5 HP arm.  If he rolled just a little higher on damage and hit the head or chest, I go down ...

I find the generally-smaller damages (after armor& magic) to weaker hit-locations to be inherently more-cinematic.  As you say, "just a point or two more" and/or "if it had been to a more-critical location" make even non-crucial hits inherently dramatic:  the player realizes how close the PC just came to Going Down Hard.

Injured locations are also inherently stakes-raising, because you've got another Hit-Location that is closer to disabling.  As a GM, I *always* narrate that:  "He's definitely favoring the leg, and moving a bit slower" (or "your leg is trembling with the shock and pain; you're worried it may give out if you press it too hard").

And when a leg or arm DOES get disabled... the character is definitely HURT (and more-at-risk!), but not down-and-out; the fight just got more desperate!

I haven't implemented it in my RQG, as yet, but may well re-up my old RQ2 HouseRule about 0-Point-Locations:  the location is "teetering on the brink."  If a leg, you need to make a DEX roll not to fall; if an arm, to keep hold of a weapon/etc.  On the centerline (head/chest/abdomen) it's a CON roll, vs. passing-out / unable-to-breathe / collapse-into-ball.  But if you can make the roll, you're still up & (semi)functional.

IME, if you just give a realistic narration of most RQ combats, it's engaging in ways "bag of HP's" combat isn't (I've slogged through too many HP-attrition-fests).  RQ combat inherently runs to the cinematic ... and to the entertaining!

===
 

And that, in the end -- the player engagement, the tension, the sense of ongoing & escalating risk-and-reward -- is something I'd like to see extended out of combat-only so that non-fighty characters have similar rules-levers to pull, rules-knobs to turn.  So they are just as mechanically-engaged in their own spotlights.

Edited October 15, 2021 by g33k

[Akhôrahil]

The thing is that outside of combat (including Spirit Combat) and chases, the system tells you how to resolve tasks, but not how to resolve conflicts. This is very common in more traditional RPGs. Sometimes Social Combat is introduced to make up for it, but Social Combat has a tendency of feeling a bit weird when tacked on to a more trad system (while it's completely integrated as just another kind of conflict in a game like HeroQuest/QuestWorlds).

How to do more with it? One way is to look at Skill Challenges from D&D, a system that can easily be adapted to RQ (essentially, you need a certain number of successes before a certain number of failures in order to succeed, from a certain set of skills, but you could just as well say that it's a certain number of rolls and the number of successes determine the quality of the outcome). But Skill Challenges come with their own set of issues - for one thing, it can lessen the drama and the impact when you spread out the rolls like this, while having a single Orate roll decide whether you can avoid feud really pushes the impact factor. It's probably most useful for extended (sometimes very extended) activities where it's not one single thing at one point in time that will result in ultimate success, like building a temple or ending a feud. The influence system mentioned by @Squaredeal Sten above is essentially a kind of Skill Challenge as well. 

[Martin Dick]

I agree, that it's a great fight scene, but especially as a long time L5R GM, there's a lot more going on in an iaijutsu duel than just an attack and a failed parry and I don't really feel that the scene from Sanjuro is modelled particularly well by the RQ combat system.

[Akhôrahil]

1 hour ago, Martin Dick said:

I agree, that it's a great fight scene, but especially as a long time L5R GM, there's a lot more going on in an iaijutsu duel than just an attack and a failed parry and I don't really feel that the scene from Sanjuro is modelled particularly well by the RQ combat system.

It's also questionable whether it would have been good for the movie if the fight had randomly gone the other way.

But the video clip is even an example of the thing we're discussing here - it's not just a fight, it's a three-part conflict consisting of a talk, a stare-down, and then the physical fight, but RQ puts vastly more rules effort into the last part. In QuestWorlds, they would be given equal weight.

(In RQG, what happens seems like an opposed roll of Orate vs. Honor, where both sides roll a success - the duel is still on, but Toshiro Mifune manages to get a concession that no-one else will be harmed. Then both sides try to Augment using Intimidate. Finally, there's a failed attack (or if you prefer, a successful dodge), and a successful (probably Special) attack against a failed (or barely attempted) defensive roll.)

Edited October 15, 2021 by Akhôrahil

[Squaredeal Sten]

As far as i can see, we have competing theories of what is dramatic and engaging for the players.  It it lots of die rolls?  it it hit locations?  Is it "dramatic" action, that is rising action and a final resolution?

And we keep coming back to combat examples. But the topic is non-combat "social" things that are engaging.

And using movies for examples of "dramatic"-

Let's cast our minds to some non-combat moves and non-combat scenes.  How about the jury scenes of "Twelve angry men"?

 

What would you say happened there?  Some sort of climactic moment?

It didn't have hit locations. 

 

 

 

 

[Akhôrahil]

29 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

"Twelve angry men"?

In this one, you clearly need to track how many people (0 to 11) who agree with you, and you succeed at 11. Since he starts at 0, he only has one shot to "switch" one of the other jurors (but this roll succeeds). Each roll corresponds to either a vote count or someone changing his mind.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Akhôrahil

[Kloster]

7 hours ago, Martin Dick said:

I agree, that it's a great fight scene, but especially as a long time L5R GM, there's a lot more going on in an iaijutsu duel than just an attack and a failed parry and I don't really feel that the scene from Sanjuro is modelled particularly well by the RQ combat system.

It works well with RQ3 and 'Land of Ninja' (no surprise).

[Runeblogger]

On 10/14/2021 at 12:05 PM, HeartQuintessence said:

Ways to do other interesting things in Runequest Glorantha other than combat, that are more than just simple dice rolls.

I love this topic. 🙂 Here's 5 ways of doing that, from different D100 systems:

1. Revolution d100's extended conflicts: Paolo Guccione transforms HeroQuest's extended conflicts into an easy D100 mechanism suitable for adding more rolls to a single dramatic action: chases, climbs, debates, infiltration, negotiation you name it. Basically each side has a pool of attrition points by adding up two characteristics. Each "attack" on the other side inflicts 1D6 "damage". There are some more bits to this basic frame. The best part is that depending on the level of points each side has lost at the end, they each have to concede smoe degree of victory to the other side.

2. M-Space extended conflicts: based straight away on the mechanism explained in Revolution d100, but a bit more simplified.

3. Mythras' item crafting rules: can also be used for high stakes debates, as the rulebook itself explains. Each side rolls their skill. Each success makes you advance 25% towards your goal, a critical 50%, and a fumble -25%. Whoever reaches 100% first is the winner.

4. Mythas Companion detailed rules for social conflicts: a bit more involved, but usable both for convincing an audience or "destroying your adversaries' social standing". They map onto the Mythras rules for combat, with "combat" effects to choose from a list after each unopposed successful attack or successful defense against a failed attack.

5. The Clash of Cleverness: a homebrewn extra system devised by Deliverator and based on Mythras/RQ6 combat and Burning Wheel's "Duel of the Wits". It's cool how it teaches the player the different approaches they can take in a debate.

I have used them all at least once in my games. As they are D100-based, all of them can be stolen for your RQG campaign.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Runeblogger

[simonh]

6 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Let's cast our minds to some non-combat moves and non-combat scenes.  How about the jury scenes of "Twelve angry men"?

He makes a series of opposed rolls against his fellow jurors. In QW this would be an extended contest. In Blades In the Dark, or Apocalypse World winning them over would be a progress clock. Usually a long term issue like that would run alongside other activities and challenges.

While that makes great cinema, it’s an extreme outlier. Very few movies get away with working within an almost one room, pressure cooker situation. It only really works because it’s a tightly scripted, constructed narrative.

[Bill the barbarian]

7 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Let's cast our minds to some non-combat moves and non-combat scenes.  How about the jury scenes of "Twelve angry men"?

Good  call, Squaredeal! Quite combative and not a weapon in sight!

 

33 minutes ago, Runeblogger said:

1. Revolution d100's extended conflicts: Paolo Guccione transforms HeroQuest's extended conflicts into an easy D100 mechanism suitable for adding more rolls to a single dramatic action: chases, climbs, debates, infiltration, negotiation you name it. Basically each side has a pool of attrition points by adding up two characteristics. Each "attack" on the other side inflicts 1D6 "damage". There are some more bits to this basic frame. The best part is that depending on the level of points each side has lost at the end, they each have to concede smoe degree of victory to the other side.

 

Interesting!

33 minutes ago, Runeblogger said:

3. Mythras' item crafting rules: can also be used for high stakes debates, as the rulebook itself explains. Each side rolls their skill. Each success makes you advance 25% towards your goal, a critical 50%, and a fumble -25%. Whoever reaches 100% first is the winner.

 

34 minutes ago, Runeblogger said:

4. Mythas Companion detailed rules for social conflicts: a bit more involved, but usable both for convincing an audience or "destroying your adversaries' social standing". They map onto the Mythras rules for combat, with "combat" effects to choose from a list after each unopposed successful attack or successful defense against a failed attack.

 

Will have to do a bit of research here.

I will add the idea of handwaveum but with a very story telling bent. Whatever makes the story advance is the correct choice here.

4 minutes ago, simonh said:

While that makes great cinema, it’s an extreme outlier. Very few movies get away with working within an almost one room, pressure cooker situation. It only really works because it’s a tightly scripted, constructed narrative.

Quite so! But it is an outlier worthy of aspiring to!

 

 

[Akhôrahil]

30 minutes ago, simonh said:

While that makes great cinema, it’s an extreme outlier. Very few movies get away with working within an almost one room, pressure cooker situation. It only really works because it’s a tightly scripted, constructed narrative.

Bottom mid 🙂

[Squaredeal Sten]

6 minutes ago, simonh said:

......... While that makes great cinema, it’s an extreme outlier. Very few movies get away with working within an almost one room, pressure cooker situation. It only really works because it’s a tightly scripted, constructed narrative.

I'm not much of a movie fan, certainly not enough of one to have a mental library of the ones that don't work.  And if i did, why would I show you a crappy one?  So here is another good one.

Now here is another, very different, movie with 100% non combat interactions.  What do you see happening here?  I think I might be able to translate the bits of this movie into Runequest mechanics,  the whole thing from end to end, not just this scene.  It also reminds me of a heroquest.

There are several more associated clips from the movie on Youtube-

Anyway, It's a wonderful life seems to me to have 'stations" like a heroquest.  That is NOT true of all dramatic scenes and movies, so let's not try to force all non-combat interactions into the same mold. 

I see a lot of room to make 'social' rather than 'combat" role[playing that occupies a fair amount of time and occupies the players' minds, far beyond "take one roll and then we'll go on to the next combat.". 

And i think it can be done with a mix of roleplaying (the players must make decisions, have and execute a plan) and Runequest mechanics:  Skill rolls, opposed rolls, plus multi-step persuasion tracking and /or multi-target influencing, depending on the story line and game situation.

To me the tricks are

(1) To succinctly give a limited set of models for the GM and players to follow, so we are not writing a whole new 300 page book which they won't take the time to read,

(2) to put the 'social" and persuasion action choices into the players' repertory, if it isn't already there.  And as I observed in the previous thread,in the absence of models to follow both the players' and the GMs' openness to this depends on their life experience.  So few people do party politics in real life! 

(3) to execute this with enough drama that it is interesting.  This is something that i see a lot of GMs, writers, and directors do better than I, so I'm here to learn.

 

For extra credit,  here is a quiz:  Who better represents the American fighting hero, John Wayne or Jimmy Stewart? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Baron Wulfraed]

1 hour ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Anyway, It's a wonderful life seems to me to have 'stations" like a heroquest.  That is NOT true of all dramatic scenes and movies, so let's not try to force all non-combat interactions into the same mold.

No surprise, since half the movie is the angel leading Stewart's character through events in his life, and how things turn out if he isn't there for them. It's an inverted heroquest. Instead of having someone who wasn't in the original scene recreate the event, the movie has one who had originally been present not "create" the original event.

[simonh]

And now I need to watch Primer again.