It would provide a level of abstraction while acknowledging its importance. Do you feel all the nuances are needed for every character in a game? NPC and PC Or, does a "marker" of a relationship fulfill the most common needs?

Quote from: Greentongue on January 10, 2022, 01:56:43 PM
It would provide a level of abstraction while acknowledging its importance. Do you feel all the nuances are needed for every character in a game? NPC and PC Or, does a "marker" of a relationship fulfill the most common needs?

That's a good question.

For me - GM experience definitely helps. Plus I'm an extrovert and very social, and I used to live on the wrong side of the tracks. So I have a lot of personal experience to draw upon. This might be the big divide. But I don't think any of my anecdotal experience is *necessary*.

Nuance in content is a tool for the GM to tune up/down any elements worthy of creating tension to keep the game moving along at the desired pace. When it comes to roleplaying the closer you get to the PC/NPC interaction the better. Here, mechanics get in the way of the intent. NOW when you're dealing with introverts or socially awkward players, you have to earn trust in them as a GM to let you take them along - and be willing to let them "explain" what they're trying to convey, if they themselves cannot RP it. But letting an interaction hang on some assumed "abstraction" of a favor, loses a whole lot of potential ground that is ripe for gaming.

It depends on the how dymanic you want your characters to be. If I'm running a Star Wars game having Han play a "favor" card instead of inteacting with his "ol' pal Lando" would lose a lot of the drama that ensued. The assumption being a "Favor Token" doesn't have strings attached. If they did - then why trust in the use of any favor-token? This brings us back to the meat-and-potatoes of good ol' fashioned roleplaying with the camera up close to the PC's and NPC's and you can let them roll Notice/Empathy or whatever checks to size each other up and the GM can give the PC's nuanced details their PC's pick up and let them decide their path accordingly.

Or you know, you can spend a Favor point and whatever you need just happens, and off the to the next encounter. The key here is making the nuance actually matter (and obviously make it fun and intriguing). That is a GM skill which needs to be exercised and mechanics might actually impede upon.

Edit: I should add, there ARE players that only want to throw dice and not actually engage in RPG's at that level. As I don't run games like that, people with anxiety issues are probably more prone to like heavy mechanics where interpersonal interactions are as abstract as possible. That's nearly impossible in my games.

Maybe HOW a favor point/token is spent is the key?
If, to use one, you have to explain how you are doing it, does that move it closer to Role Playing?
With the assumption that because of the point/token, it will work (unless GM overrides).

@Tenbones, I think you may be describing a dichotomy that does not necessarily exist. See, this...

QuoteOr you know, you can spend a Favor point and whatever you need just happens, and off the to the next encounter.

...is not the case, in my experience, with the games that use Favor economy we're talking about here.

In Monsterhearts, for example, the player can't simply say: "Ok, it's my turn: So it's 9 PM and I want to spend the String I have with Marco, so he gives me his sister's gmail password.... Ok, I scratched the String off my sheet. GM, what's the password?" Nope. The use of Strings is regulated under certain conditions that mimic real life exchange of favors/debt/etc. So, for that to happen, the player would have to first meet Marco in person, then engage in a conversation and try to convince him to give the player the password. And that requires roleplaying out their characters in zoomed-in fashion just as you said above, with any relevant rolls adjudicated by the GM. The String just points to some kind of leverage the player has over Marco - just as those work in real life - and that can give the owner advantage, not some token that automatically edit reality like magic.

So, notice that everything you describe here...

Quote from: TenbonesThis brings us back to the meat-and-potatoes of good ol' fashioned roleplaying with the camera up close to the PC's and NPC's and you can let them roll Notice/Empathy or whatever checks to size each other up and the GM can give the PC's nuanced details their PC's pick up and let them decide their path accordingly.

...would still happen in that scene. The Strings in no way exclude that interaction from happenning. On the contrary, it requires it. I would agree with you if we were talking about mechanics like, say, those Hillfolk "drama points" that are negotiated between players and don't really exist in the fictional universe/in-character. But the Favor mechanics we're talking about (Vampire's Boons, Monsterhearts' Strings, etc) actually do exist from the character standpoint.

Edit: Ninjad by Greentongue, I guess.

Quote from: Itachi on January 10, 2022, 06:44:04 PM
@Tenbones, I think you may be describing a dichotomy that does not necessarily exist. See, this...

QuoteOr you know, you can spend a Favor point and whatever you need just happens, and off the to the next encounter.

...is not the case, in my experience, with the games that use Favor economy we're talking about here.

In Monsterhearts, for example, the player can't simply say: "Ok, it's my turn: So it's 9 PM and I want to spend the String I have with Marco, so he gives me his sister's gmail password.... Ok, I scratched the String off my sheet. GM, what's the password?" Nope. The use of Strings is regulated under certain conditions that mimic real life exchange of favors/debt/etc. So, for that to happen, the player would have to first meet Marco in person, then engage in a conversation and try to convince him to give the player the password. And that requires roleplaying out their characters in zoomed-in fashion just as you said above, with any relevant rolls adjudicated by the GM. The String just points to some kind of leverage the player has over Marco - just as those work in real life - and that can give the owner advantage, not some token that automatically edit reality like magic.

So, notice that everything you describe here...

Quote from: TenbonesThis brings us back to the meat-and-potatoes of good ol' fashioned roleplaying with the camera up close to the PC's and NPC's and you can let them roll Notice/Empathy or whatever checks to size each other up and the GM can give the PC's nuanced details their PC's pick up and let them decide their path accordingly.

...would still happen in that scene. The Strings in no way exclude that interaction from happenning. On the contrary, it requires it. I would agree with you if we were talking about mechanics like, say, those Hillfolk "drama points" that are negotiated between players and don't really exist in the fictional universe/in-character. But the Favor mechanics we're talking about (Vampire's Boons, Monsterhearts' Strings, etc) actually do exist from the character standpoint.

Edit: Ninjad by Greentongue, I guess.

Then "Strings" aren't necessary, since the characters have to navigate all of the minutia to make the "favor" happen, anyway.  So they are superfluous, then?

Strings are not superfluous in Monsterhearts, as they have important effects they can enact. Eg: +1 on a roll to manipulate the recipient. Notice though they do not replace social interactions, only affecting/adding to it instead.

QuoteUsing it as a mechanic free of that context makes it like a card-game/board-game mechanic where you backfill the nuances that otherwise the player couldn't manage through roleplaying.

QuoteThis is what I suspect is at play here. These kinds of mechanics exist for people that don't like getting that close to the roleplaying fire and just want to throw dice at problems in the game without RP context.

But the whole point with moves, and all extra mechanics enforcing genre in post-PBTA games is not free you from RP.
Quite opposite. How you roleplay scenes determines whether move will happen at all, it determines whether you will be able to use any extra mechanics be it Social one or otherwise, it determines your position and effect.

Mechanics there are genre enforcing. You use mechanics when something genre-related happens. You wanna plumb a kitchen sink - like whatever, it's not what game is about, roll luck or something, or you just did it. Favours, Strings and so for - either prompts you to use them - therefore doing genre-related stuff, and pushing whole genre shit forward - because they are worthy XP if used, or give you some quantifiable mechanically bonus when you use them in specific situation. Which seems relatively natural thing to me.

So no - in all those games quite explictly you cannot do jackshit without describing/roleplaying it.
If anything I'd say old skill based game were more lenient with social skills, and there were no good incentive to just not use them.

QuoteThen "Strings" aren't necessary, since the characters have to navigate all of the minutia to make the "favor" happen, anyway.  So they are superfluous, then?

No not really, they are quantifiable high ground you have over another PC or NPC.
Just like you know - high ground in combat. So they gives you better chances to succeed.
And in PC relations when they can be sort of PVP they allow to you know RP being based purely on players bias, which means any power struggle starts to be more struggle between players than characters. Here well if you fail - game forces you to RP it accordingly.

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 10, 2022, 08:22:32 PM
No not really, they are quantifiable high ground you have over another PC or NPC.
Just like you know - high ground in combat. So they gives you better chances to succeed.
And in PC relations when they can be sort of PVP they allow to you know RP being based purely on players bias, which means any power struggle starts to be more struggle between players than characters. Here well if you fail - game forces you to RP it accordingly.

That's a great example.

Quote from: Itachi on January 10, 2022, 08:26:29 PM

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 10, 2022, 08:22:32 PM
No not really, they are quantifiable high ground you have over another PC or NPC.
Just like you know - high ground in combat. So they gives you better chances to succeed.
And in PC relations when they can be sort of PVP they allow to you know RP being based purely on players bias, which means any power struggle starts to be more struggle between players than characters. Here well if you fail - game forces you to RP it accordingly.

That's a great example.

So, instead of a mechanic, I can just give the characters a bonus on rolls because they have met/interacted/done a favor for the NPC before?  Basically, like I said, they are superfluous?

And instead of any mechanics you can just give characters bonuses/difficulty levels based on how they describe their movements, actions, words, and so on.
No mechanics needed

You are warrior fighting goblin, ok you need to roll at least 6 at d20 and you hit him. Seems fair.

Quote from: tenbones on January 10, 2022, 10:13:57 AMIn the case of Prestation it's the implied unknowable qualities of the relationship and power-dynamics that makes Prestation scary.

[/quote]Prestation sounds like a procedure that I'd rather not undergo.

Quote from: tenbones on January 10, 2022, 10:13:57 AM
This is what I suspect is at play here. These kinds of mechanics exist for people that don't like getting that close to the roleplaying fire and just want to throw dice at problems in the game without RP context.

Some of the time that's true.

For me, some method of tracking interactions is necessary once the number of participants (PCs and NPCs) gets large enough. Not using any mechanics to track who owes who what works undoubtedly works better in simpler settings where the number of relationships and possible interactions is smaller and can be dealt with on an ad hoc, in the moment basis. Or, alternatively, in a game where lack of setting consistency isn't a big deal – so if the GM ignores or forgets some details of previous interactions (like a debt) it's no big deal.

Some people prefer not to track wealth beyond some vague description like poor or wealthy. Some people don't track encumbrance. And some don't count arrows or torches. Because they want to focus on roleplaying...or maybe they just suck at arithmetic. I don't know. Keeping track of things, wealth, weight, arrows, favor sometime makes for a more interesting game for me. Roleplaying out in real time and in detail every purchase made in the market place just doesn't.

Quote from: tenbones on January 10, 2022, 04:06:02 PMIt depends on the how dymanic you want your characters to be. If I'm running a Star Wars game having Han play a "favor" card instead of inteacting with his "ol' pal Lando" would lose a lot of the drama that ensued. The assumption being a "Favor Token" doesn't have strings attached. If they did - then why trust in the use of any favor-token?

Well that explains part of the disconnect. That's opposite of how I use favors.

QuoteOr you know, you can spend a Favor point and whatever you need just happens, and off the to the next encounter.

Yeah, unless the PCs are supposed to be in a world that works like a 1930s movie serial, I don't do that either.

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 10, 2022, 08:50:45 PM
And instead of any mechanics you can just give characters bonuses/difficulty levels based on how they describe their movements, actions, words, and so on.
No mechanics needed

You don't know the definition of mechanics, do you?

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 10, 2022, 08:50:45 PM
You are warrior fighting goblin, ok you need to roll at least 6 at d20 and you hit him. Seems fair.

And?  Why is that process not suitable for favors (we're not talking about combat, remember)?

Mechanics is there to focus on whatever game is about.
If game is about social conflict then social conflict will be heavier mechanised while combat will be handwaved more or less.

D&D is generally about combat at least last 3 iterations. Monsterhearts is about teenagers messing with their minds.

Quote from: tenbones on January 10, 2022, 10:13:57 AM
Prestation is something I'm intimately familiar with since it defacto exists in pretty much every single RPG I've ever run, before and after Vampire (which is why I loved Vampire so much when it dropped).

It's one of those things where by saying mechanics doesn't influence RP - then I say "well then what good is it for?" -  I'm not arguing with you @Itachi, I'm being serious (well not serious-serious, but you know).

As I've gotten older and more experienced GMing, I've realize *I* get more from my games with less mechanics. This doesn't mean I don't need or want mechanics, but the mechanics have to serve the point of roleplaying *and* the game. For instance, I don't generally like handwaving different types of magic under one rubric of rules. Mainly because if I do, it waters down what "magic" actually is, and whatever assumed distinctions exist in-setting on those types of magic. It's one of the things I'm *constantly* wrestling with in Savage Worlds.

Conversely, what I want is a mechanic to make those things playable and distinct as close to the PC's as possible. If I rely on a mechanic instead of roleplaying where I can get more nuanced results, then the mechanic has less use.

In the case of Prestation it's the implied unknowable qualities of the relationship and power-dynamics that makes Prestation scary. That IS the intention of the concept. There is no inherent honor among Vampires that can't be solved murdering someone in the dark. The implicit idea is that it can't be made public to the peers that uphold the idea in-setting. Using it as a mechanic free of that context makes it like a card-game/board-game mechanic where you backfill the nuances that otherwise the player couldn't manage through roleplaying.

This is what I suspect is at play here. These kinds of mechanics exist for people that don't like getting that close to the roleplaying fire and just want to throw dice at problems in the game without RP context.

I would use the word 'guanxi' myself. I find it a useful term, and I'm not above stealing words from other languages to describe a concept.

Yeah I'm not speaking to any particular game that has these mechanics, I'm just questioning the overall value in lieu of roleplaying.

I can see things, like in Vampire where you might have a Reputation or Clan Prestige score which *denotes* something specific about any interactions within roleplaying with a faction (regardless of size) which might give mechanical benefits if using a skill like Persuasion, Intimidate etc.

The idea of "favors" is very specific to me. What someone assumes, what someone thinks they can get away with, what someone *really* means when an action occurs (That guy bought me a drink of very high-quality whiskey... why? What does he want? Or why did that woman just give me the this magical sword?) is grist for Roleplaying. The moment you put it to a currency without the assumption of enforcement - socially or physically, implied or otherwise, it removes possibilities off the table and turns it into a contract that only exists on that "currency" that doesn't exist anywhere but in the mechanics.

It reduces the potential relationship between NPC and PC to a transactional mechanic that has less nuance. And the more it's used the more reinforced this artificial distance becomes.

*Yes* you can play this way. I question "Why", when you can get more from just straight-up roleplaying. Of course you have to want to roleplay. I believe it actually makes for a disincentive to roleplaying itself on a personal player-to-GM level.