Decommissioned: Social Conflict Mechanic (first thoughts)

This morning as I was thinking about my nearly finished Mock AP (I know… I know…), I started thinking about how to resolve social conflict in Decommissioned.  Instead of giving stats that are rolled versus other stats or target numbers, I’m thinking about a system where the PC builds cred with a group and once an amount is reached, the PC wins social conflicts.  If the amount hasn’t been reached, then the PC must spend cred to get what they want, or take it to a physical conflict or threat of one to get what they want.

I’m trying to reflect the culture of popularity or mob influence with this idea.  I imagine that with D-Com most games won’t be heavy on the social conflict, so the potential webs of influence that this mechanic would create won’t be too complex.  So, I may have a playground where I could try something that interests me without bogging down the game.

To restate with some simplistic mechanics to try to visualize this more clearly.  

Imagine every NPC has three reaction states to the PC: no way, maybe and sure.  No Way means the NPC has no buy-in to what the PC says, there is no trust.  Maybe means the NPC might be swayed, but won’t follow blindly.  Sure means the NPC trusts the PC’s word and will believe them in most every situation.

Now imagine that every NPC has three decision stages about any given action: Never, Sometimes, Why Not.  The stages are self-explanatory about the willingness, but it gives a gauge about the level of conflict.

So, the PC wants an NPC to quit their job.  If the NPC was at Why Not decision, then unless the NPC was at No Way reaction, then there is no conflict.  Even if the NPC was at No Way, the GM can still allow the NPC to quit their job and even move their reaction up to Maybe without a conflict based on story reasons or roleplay by the PC (”Hey, I’ve been meaning to get into another line of work, you’re right” reaction).

But now if the NPC really enjoyed their job, then they might be at Never decision.  Now, we probably have a conflict when the PC says, “Hey dude, quit your job.”  Let’s say the PC has a Sure reaction from the NPC.  With good RP or if story appropriate, the NPC is convinced to quit his job by the PC.  The penalty is that the NPC drops one rank down in reaction to Maybe.  The NPC is taking a chance on the PCs urging by quitting their job and they are much more reluctant to take a further chance without some kind of serious convincing.

Now, if in this same conflict with the NPC who likes his job, let’s say the NPC was at Maybe reaction.  The PC could still convince the NPC to quit their job, but then their reaction would drop to No Way.  The PC has effectively burnt the relationship for the foreseeable future.

One last go at it.  the NPC digs their job, but they have a No Way Reaction to the PC.  The PC cannot convince the NPC to quit their job by talking.  It just won’t happen.

Here’s another wrinkle.  In the two examples above where the PC got the NPC to quit their job but had to take a drop in the NPC’s reaction to them, the PC can counter with a Deal.  For example, in the same example, if the PC had said, “If you quit your job, I will cut you in on this bank heist and we will both get rich,” then when the NPC agreed, the reaction still drops, but if the PC does follow through, then the NPC’s reaction is won back and can increase or even max out depending on the results.  Another aspect of this is that as long as a Deal is in place, the NPC’s reaction won’t drop any further.  The idea of in for a penny, in for a pound stands.  The only way for an NPC to drop reaction is to break the Deal.

This mechanic could be tracked on a sheet of paper, or it could be tracked by moving chips on a relationship chart.  I kind of like the chart.  The best version would be something in Excel because it would be pretty slick and look techy.

Tags: game mechanics, social conflict