Thinking About Forms of Persuasion (#NED 6: Shame)

For those unfamiliar with the rules I use for social encounters, they’re fairly simple. The reaction roll (2d6 modified by Charisma) functions as an analogue for the attack roll. The base target is ≥9, which can be modified up or down as circumstances merit. It’s something I’ve discussed on the blog frequently over the years, perhaps most usefully in No-Prep Social Encounters. The current iteration of the system is fairly loosy-goosy, but it evolved out of a highly formalized one with codified social actions that each had unique mechanics to govern them. That sort of formalization doesn’t work well for me at the table. However, it’s still useful to think about how different approaches to social encounters might be categorized. How might one approach succeed when another fails; what different consequences might result from one style over another?

Take for example the act of persuasion. The player characters are trying to talk a non-player character into doing something they may not be inclined to do. Whatever their specific phrasing is, it can probably be boiled down to something like this:

Shame — Probably the least effective method for an individual to employ. Shame is much more likely to result in the target lashing out in anger, or lapsing into depressed inactivity. Community is also a pretty effective shield against shame. If the players try to shame a goblin for eating babies, all her goblin friends are going to reassure her that eating babies is normal and that the adventurers just have a pro-baby bias.

Entice — Luring someone to take action in order to achieve something they want is going to be much more effective than shame is, but it’s also bounded by some strict limitations. First, it has to be something the target actually does want. Players cant just incept desires into NPC’s heads. Second, they’ve gotta believe it’s something they’ll actually get if they do the thing the players want them to do. The more abstract the benefit, the less likely they are to think it can be manifested. (Players are always trying to convince NPCs to let them do stuff “because in a few years things will be better for everyone, and that includes you!” or some such nonsense.) Third, the amount that they desire the thing needs to be outweighed by the risk and effort involved in getting it. Everybody wants a shiny gold coin, but their time and safety are worth something to them.

Cajole — Attempting to make the target view the desired action as normal or trivial. Hinges entirely on how charming the PC is, and how much the NPC values their bond. “C’mon, we’re friends, right? C’moooon.”

Threaten — Pretty much only effective for the shortest of short-term gains. A threat will gain you advantage for a moment, and an enemy for life. And you only get the advantage if your threat is credible! Of course, threats can be institutionalized to work over the long term…

Legal — Really just a sub-form of Threaten that involves extra steps. The target has got to be someone who lives within a system of laws, they’ve gotta believe you posses the standing necessary to press legal claim against them, and you’ve gotta demonstrate that the they have some relevant legal vulnerability. Of course, that last step can be skipped if you’re just doing…

Fast Talk — In content, fast talk tends to resemble one of the other approaches. In form, though, it’s all about tricking people into making a decision before they’ve actually thought about it. Frighten them with spurious legal threats, entice them with fantasies, cajole someone who doesn’t actually like you much, etc. Once the target has a moment to think they’re likely to realize they’ve been bamboozled, and people do not generally like people who bamboozle them.

Of course, these are just the ones I came up with in the shower this morning. No doubt I’ll get a few suggestions for ones I missed.

Check out the hashtags #DICEMBER or #DICEMBER2021 on your social media of choice to see other participants.