https://kanestarkillerd20.blogspot.c...onal-rule.html
DEBATES
A debate is a social contest between two or more parties. A debate may be performed to influence a listener or audience or to settle a personal disagreement. There are several steps to follow in preparing for the debate, some of which are optional depending on the presence of an audience and what is at stake.
Debates can be used to add novelty to a campaign focused on physical conflict, present challenges that can’t be overcome simply by the application of powers, or to lend the excitement often found in action oriented games to campaigns centered on intrigue or where combat is less likely or undesirable.
DEBATE TERMINOLOGY
Active Participant: The last character to set a new exchange DC
Ante: The value of the current exchange. This number is added to the DC for any determination checks made as a result of conceding a point or failing a counter.
Counter: An attempt to respond to an opening or counter used in the current exchange. If the counter succeeds, a new exchange DC is set and the character who used it becomes the active participant.
Determination: A character’s ability to remain relevant to the debate in the eyes of the audience. Each participant has a determination score equal to the sum of their Awareness, Fighting, Intellect, and Presence.
Determination check: When a character concedes a point or fails a counter, they must attempt a determination check. The DC of this check is 15, plus the ante value recorded at the moment of concession or a failed counter, plus the exchange winner’s determination score.
Discredited: After failing a determination check by four degrees, a debate participant becomes discredited in the eyes of the audience. Discredited participants cannot open an exchange and can no longer win the debate. Discredited characters also suffer a -2 circumstance penalty when using any counter or a -5 circumstance penalty when attempting to counter the participant who discredited them. If a discredited participant wins an exchange, the losing participant receives a +10 bonus to their determination check.
Exchange: An alternating verbal contest during which participants attempt to build their case and achieve recognition from the audience. Participants choose tactics to make their point which other participants have an opportunity to counter. Exchanges tend to escalate until participants concede the point or fail to counter making the active participant the winner of the exchange.
Exchange DC: The result of the most recent skill check made when employing a debate tactic. This number sets the DC for any counter attempt. If a counter attempt exceeds the current exchange DC, that skill check result sets the new exchange DC of any subsequent counter attempts.
Leverage: Allows a character to reroll a skill check when using a tactic. Debate participants can accumulate leverage to spend during exchanges.
Negative Bias: Debate tactics which the audience prefers to see avoided during an exchange.
Participant: Any character directly involved in the debate.
Positive Bias: Debate tactics which the audience tends to respond favorably to.
Tactic: A method of swaying audience opinion.
DEBATE PREPARATION
Once all of the debate participants understand what is at stake and whether the debate is a private or public affair, each participant and their allies may take steps to influence the outcome as described below. All if these actions are optional.
DISCERN BIAS
By making an Insight check to evaluate an audience a debate participant (or ally) can learn one of the audience's biases for each degree of success (see graded checks). The difficulty class and time rank measurement of this check is determined by the gamemaster depending on the audience size and composition. If the audience is a single individual or small group, the DC is based on opposed Deception checks unless the audience makes no effort to hide or minimize their bias.
Once a character attempts to assess an audience's biases, the check can’t be retried for the purposes of the current debate.
SEEDING AN AUDIENCE
If the gamemaster allows, a character can attempt to gain leverage for one of the participants in the debate by seeding the audience. To do so, the character must know at least one of the audience’s biases and must choose one of them to influence. This requires a successful Deception, Intimidation or Persuasion check and an amount of time determined by the audience size.
Positive Bias: The character can seed a positive bias and earn leverage which one debate participant can use with the tactic associated with that bias. This check can’t be retired for the purposes of the current debate and if it fails by two or more degrees, no further attempts to seed an audience with that positive bias can be attempted on behalf of the same debate participant.
Negative Bias: The character can seed a negative bias and earn leverage which one debate participant can use when countering the tactic associated with the negative bias. This check can’t be retired for the purposes of the current debate and if it fails by two or more degrees, no further attempts to seed an audience with that negative bias can be attempted on behalf of the same debate participant.
Both sides of a debate can attempt to seed the audience before debate commences and can attempt to influence the same biases. A given participant can only benefit from a single successful seeding of any particular bias, however.
DEBATE TACTICS AND TRAITS
Participants involved in a debate make use of traits already present in most characters. Debate participants use a trait called determination as an expression of their conviction, resolve and self-confidence. Determination measures each participant’s ability to remain relevant to the discussion in the consciousness of the audience. Debate participants can also gain and use leverage, representing a significant advantage either present at the start of the debate, perhaps as a result of a participants personal qualities or social standing, or gained by actions taken to influence the audience or other participants before or during the debate. Finally, participants can make use of special debate actions called tactics which are used to impress an audience and oppose arguments forwarded by the other participants.
Leverage
Leverage can be gained by seeding a bias, using a debate tactic, when an opponent decides to end an exchange, or due to some other effect. A debate participant can spend leverage to reroll an associated skill check when employing a debate tactic.
Determination
Characters participating in a debate receive determination score which is equal to the sum of their mental abilities (Awareness, Fighting, Intellect, and Presence). In addition, the gamemaster can apply a circumstance bonus or penalty to each participant’s determination score based on audience preconception, participant appearance, social status and any number of other factors.
Tactics
Tactics are the strikes, parries, weapons and shields of debates. At the start of a debate, each participant should look over their skills and the tactics associated with them and then assign one skill to each tactic. A debate participant can only assign any given skill to a single tactic, so if they decide to assign Expertise: Oration to the allegory tactic, that particular skill could not be also assigned to emotional appeal (or any other tactic). Additional bonuses or penalties may apply to a skill check due to the audience's bias, as well as from the following considerations:
•Last Tactic: Using the same tactic to counter one that was just used often appears awkward and may be considered poor form. When doing so, the active participant takes a -2 circumstance penalty on the associated skill check for the tactic. For example, if your opponent uses mockery against you, you can choose to counter with mockery, but you take the -2 penalty on your associated skill check when you do.
•Repetition of Tactics: Using the same tactic over and over again is generally not an effective way to win debates and when a participant does so, it may appear that they have no other arguments to make. Over the course of a debate, each time a participant wins an exchange with a particular tactic, that participant takes a cumulative -2 penalty when using the tactic again due to audience fatigue and the fact that opponents are more likely to have a suitable response
•Tactic Interaction: Some tactics can be more or less effective when used as a counter other tactics. It is harder to counter a logical argument with mockery, for example. The description of each tactic features an “Interaction” entry if that tactic has noteworthy conflicts and synergies.
DEBATE EXCHANGES AND RESOLUTION
After handling all pre-debate considerations and introducing the participants to the audience, the debate can begin. Some debates are fast-paced arguments that begin with little preamble as soon as one participant chooses to start talking. Others are highly structured affairs and may feature some form of moderation by one or more non-participants as might be the case with legal proceedings or diplomatic negotiations.
The gamemaster is free to adjudicate the start of the debate as best fits the circumstances, but all participants must be aware that the debate is about to occur and should have equal time to interact with the audience beforehand. In a structured debate, lots might be drawn to determine who will speak first, or perhaps once participant is chosen to open the debate out of social considerations such as age or rank. If it is ever unclear which participant should start, the game master may call for a die roll to determine who speaks first. Perhaps by calling for Intellect checks or having participants roll initiative.
Exchanges
Debates are resolved with a series of exchanges representing a clash of ideas and arguments made for and against one participant’s case.
At the start of each exchange, one of the participants chooses an opening tactic, making them the active participant. The active participant makes a check using the skill they have assigned to the chosen tactic, increases the ante of the exchange by 1, and sets the current exchange DC to the result of their skill check. The ante of the exchange begins at 0 but changes in value throughout the exchange and is added to the determination check DC made by the loser(s) of the exchange.
Once the opening tactic is declared and the exchange DC is recorded, one of the opposing participants must decide whether to counter the active participant’s opening or concede the point. If any participant decides to counter the opening, the ante of the exchange increases by 1, then that character chooses a countering tactic, and attempts the associated skill check. If that skill check exceeds the current DC of the exchange, the exchange continues with the new exchange DC and the countering character becomes the active participant.
The character who opened the exchange may now try to counter or concede the point. If the character concedes or the counter attempt fails to exceed the current DC of the exchange, that character is forced out of the exchange. Any other participant can now attempt a counter the tactic of the active participant until all participants fail, concede, or successfully counter and set a new exchange DC.
The exchange continues until each participant has conceded the point or failed a counter attempt. The last participant forced out the exchange can either open a new exchange as the active participant or bow out of the debate. Characters who have been discredited (see below) cannot open a new exchange but may pass to the next to last participant if they do not wish to bow out.
If any participants concede an exchange or fail a counter attempt, they must make a determination check with a DC equal to 15 + the exchange winner’s determination score. They also take a penalty to this check equal to exchange ante at the time of their concession or failed counter attempt. The winner of the exchange also gains leverage if any participants conceded to any of their tactics.
When a character fails a determination check, the suffer a cumulative -1 penalty to all future determination checks (similar to failing a toughness check when suffering damage). If a character fails a determination check by two or three degrees, they suffer a penalty to their next skill check made to use a debate tactic (-2 for failing by two degrees, -5 for failing by three degrees). If they fail by four or more degrees, they are discredited and become unable to win the debate or open an exchange. In addition, such characters suffer a -2 circumstance penalty when using any counter. This penalty increases to -5 when countering a tactic used by the participant who discredited them. If a discredited participant wins an exchange, the losing participant receives a +10 bonus to their determination check.
Resolution
At the end of each exchange, any participant can call for an end to the debate and attempt to set terms for the outcome. If all participants agree, the debate is considered a draw. Otherwise, one or more participants may be called upon to bow out. The debate also ends automatically when all but one of the participants has been discredited. In these cases, the participant who is not discredited is recognized by the audience as the winner. Ungracious participants who have been discredited may refuse to bow out and continue to make their case, but the audience tends to drift away, refuse to listen or become hostile depending on the present scenario.
The influence of the debate’s resolution depends upon what was at stake. If there was a clear winner, the audience views that character at least somewhat favorably and tends to agree with their point of view (at least as it was presented during the debate). This can benefit the winner legally or socially, and those benefits may apply immediately or positively influence later events. Losing a debate doesn’t necessarily mean that a character loses friends, social standing, legal rights, money or anything else of significant value. Certainly, if losing participants conducted themselves well, they may not appear to have lost anything; their tactics simply failed to appear as effective or influential as their opponents’. Truly significant social conflicts include debates as merely one facet of a larger struggle and may require additional debates or other challenges before any lasting effects are known.
LIST OF TACTICS
ALLEGORY
You use a fable or parable featuring an underlying message to frame the debate. While it is sometimes difficult to use allegory in the heat of an exchange, it makes a very effective opener.
Associated Skills: Expertise: History, Expertise: Theology, Expertise: Acting, Expertise: Oration, Expertise: Philosophy and Religion
Interaction: You take a -2 penalty on the associated skill checks when using allegory to counter.
Special: If you use allegory to open an exchange, and your opponent chooses to end the exchange rather than attempt to counter your allegory, increase the exchange's current ante by 2 (before your opponent's determination check) instead of gaining leverage.
BAITING
You hurl taunts and barbs, or level false dichotomies, goading your opponent into a trap. Baiting works best when the stakes are already high, since in that case backing down can be even more damaging than blundering into your trap.
Associated Skills: Deception, Expertise: Comedy, Insight, Intimidation
Interaction: When a participant uses any tactic other than presence, they take a -2 circumstance penalty on the associated skill check to countering baiting.
Special: Baiting cannot be employed to open an exchange. If your opponent chooses to concede rather than counter, your baiting doesn't suffer the normal -2 penalty on future associated skill checks for winning an exchange.
EMOTIONAL APPEAL
You make an argument appealing to the emotional desires of your opponents or the audience. This tactic is particularly useful against participants with an advantage in status or knowledge; raising the emotional stakes can be rewarding, but it can also be dangerous.
Associated Skills: Deception, Expertise: Oration, Insight
Interaction: You gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check when using an emotional appeal to counter logic, presence, and rhetoric.
Special: Successfully countering with an emotional appeal increases the exchange's ante by an additional 1.
FLATTERY
You ingratiate yourself to one or more of your opponents, giving you an advantage. Often deceptive and manipulative, this tactic can also represent the actions of characters who are genuinely likeable and friendly.
Associated Skills: Deception, Expertise: Diplomacy, Expertise: Journalism, Expertise: Psychology, Persuasion
Interaction: You take a –2 penalty on the associated skill check when using flattery to counter mockery. You gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check when using flattery to counter presence.
Special: If you win an exchange with flattery, reduce the ante of the exchange by 2 (minimum 0) and gain leverage that can be used with any skill check during the debate.
LOGIC
When you use logic, you present facts, figures, and expert testimony. While logic can still be used to mislead your adversary or the audience, unlike most other tactics, it still requires a strong understanding of the subject matter to do so.
Associated Skills: Expertise (any pertinent); depending on the subject, Investigation, Technology, Treatment or Vehicles could apply.
Interaction: You gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check when you use logic as an opener. You take a –2 penalty on the associated skill check when you use logic to counter baiting, emotional appeal, mockery, red herring, or wit.
Special: When you win an exchange with logic, you gain leverage that you can only use with logic.
MOCKERY
You use personal attacks, mudslinging, or creative insults to belittle your opponent. Mockery works best when you capitalize on your opponent's use of an unpopular tactic.
Associated Skills: Deception, Expertise: Comedy, Expertise: Gossip Columnist, Intimidation
Interaction: You take a -2 penalty on the associated skill check when you use mockery to counter logic and wit.
Special: You gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check when you use mockery to counter a tactic with a negative audience bias, and if you win the exchange with mockery against such a tactic, increase the ante by 1. You take a -2 penalty on the associated skill check when you use mockery to counter a tactic with a positive audience bias, though if you succeed, reduce the ante by 1.
PRESENCE
You make a show of confidence or true nobility or you simply put on airs, and an opponent's claims slide off and bounce back against him, leaving you unscathed. This tactic works to deflect baiting and mockery but is less effective against other tricks.
Associated Skills: Intimidation, Expertise: Aristocracy, Expertise: Noble, Expertise: Rulership
Interaction: You gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check when you use presence to counter baiting or mockery. You take a -2 penalty on the associated skill check when using presence to counter allegory, emotional appeal, or red herring.
Special: If you win an exchange with presence, you remove one -1 penalty to your determination checks (if applicable)
RED HERRING
You use this tactic to distract your opponent or the audience from the heart of the debate, avoiding the danger of the current exchange. While a red herring can't be used as an opener, it can be used to quickly end an exchange that is getting too dangerous to continue.
Associated Skills: Deception, Expertise: Current Events, Expertise: Gossip Columnist, Expertise: Oration
Special: You cannot use red herring as an opener.
When using a red herring as a counter, you can choose to gain a +4 bonus on the associated skill check. If you do so and succeed, instead of continuing and escalating the exchange as normal, you automatically win the exchange but no participants make any determination checks. Unlike normal, you start the next exchange.
RHETORIC
You use versatile debating tactics, applying advantageous rhetorical devices to squash your opponent's arguments.
Most of the verbal maneuvers included in this tactic are simple and forthright linguistic devices; deceptive debating gambits are often included as part of other tactics such as baiting, emotional appeal, mockery, or red herring. Rhetoric is a multipurpose tactic that lacks some of the dangers of other tactics, but doesn't offer any significant rewards either.
Associated Skills: Expertise: Linguistics, Expertise: Oration, Expertise: Philosophy, Expertise: Politics, Persuasion
Special: Since rhetoric involves subtle word choices that most audiences don't notice consciously, it is very rare for an audience to have a negative bias toward rhetoric.
WIT
You use humor or cleverness to gain an advantage over your opponent, but the tactic can backfire if your jokes and jibes fall flat.
Associated Skills: Expertise: Comedy, Expertise: Linguistics
Special: When using wit, you can choose to gain a +2 bonus on the associated skill check. If you do so and fail the associated skill check, decrease you take a -1 penalty to determination checks for the rest of the debate (just as if you had failed a determination check). If you fail by two or more degrees, you take a -2 penalty on wit's associated skill checks for the rest of the debate.
DETERMINATION CHECK RESULTS
Determination check result vs. [winner’s determination score + 15]
Success: No effect
Failure (one degree): The character suffers a -1 circumstance penalty to further determination checks made during the debate
Failure (two degrees): The character takes a -2 penalty on their next tactic check and has a -1 circumstance penalty to further determination checks made during the debate
Failure (three degrees): The character takes a -5 penalty on their next tactic check and has a -1 circumstance penalty to further determination checks made during the debate
Failure (four degrees): The character is discredited
Circumstance penalties to determination checks are cumulative.
Note: These rules are adapted from verbal duels as presented in Ultimate Intrigue for use the the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.