We return, dear readers, to the Unisystem.  (Have we ever really left?)  I've been thinking about a lot of things lately about how I like games to run.  Eventually, I might undertake to design a game completely around the principals I'm mulling over, but for now I want to see if I can implement the concepts in an existing game.

Unisystem is a great one for this purpose, since the system is so easy to tinker with in general.  For these articles, I'm focusing on the Cinematic rules, but they'll adapt to Classic Unisystem almost effortlessly.

First up is the dreaded topic of Social Skill Use on PCs.

Any time an NPC does something to a PC, it has the potential to be un-fun for the player.  Getting stabbed, ensorcelled, or snuck past is no fun, but the results can be fun and the absence of the possibility makes the whole game kind of boring.  Social skills are even worse than physical ones, though.  The results of a physical action will tell a player what happens to his character: You're hurt; You don't notice X; You're turned into a frog.  Social skills, in theory, tell a player how he has to play his character: You're in love with the evil princess; You're scared of the bully and have to run away; You believe the war in Iraq is completely just and logical.

That can suck.  Not always, of course.  Sometimes it's a lot of fun to play the besotted victim of a seductress, or the enraged guy who goes after his own friends because he's been fooled or magically charmed.  But some players really hate it.  Some are terrifically bad at it.  And sometimes, even for the folks who normally like it, it's just not their thing that night.

Worse yet, basically social skills come down to GM Fiat.  The rules tell you what happens in a concrete way when you get stabbed, and exactly how to overcome the wounds.  All the rules usually tell you about being conned, seduced, or intimidated is to roleplay it.

So I wanted to come up with a system that would be more concrete, without adding too much complexity or weight to the game.  "Social hit points" might be really interesting, but honestly they don't quite work like physical hit points anyway, and I'd have to add new stats and stuff to the game.

Instead, I'm building off the Success Level system and the system that allows complementary skill use to give you bonuses or hit the other guy with penalties.  It works like this:

When an NPC uses a social skill on a PC, the GM states a goal like "he wants to get in your pants," or "she wants to fool you into believing X."  He doesn't necessarily have to tell the player the goal, because sometimes that would ruin the interaction, but he needs a baseline.

With the goal in mind, the GM sets a difficulty, taking into account things like the PC's Drawbacks and Qualities and situational modifiers.  For example, if a she-vampire is trying to seduce a PC and drag him off for dinner, and the PC has Lecherous -1, the PC is going to take his lecherous penalty.  But if he also has Honorable 3 and leaving right now would violate his code, the vamp might get a penalty to her roll, too.

The test is Opposed, generally using Willpower for the "defender" and Intelligence or Perception for the "attacker," but there are other ways to stack it out.  Influence is usually the relevant skill unless you got all fancy with Wild Card skills.  (For you Classic users, there's Orate, Seduction, Haggling, and whatnot.)

If the attacker wins, the defender has a choice.  Option A is to do whatever the GM says he's been convinced to do, within reason.  Some goals might take multiple tests.  A vampire trying to seduce a victim might need to get his attention, get him to dance with her, then convince him to go off alone with her.  Option B is to accept a penalty to all "mental" tests equal to the margin of success.  So if the vampire netted 3 SL, the victim would be at a -3 to things like perception tests (he can't stop looking at her), social tests (he's hung up on her and says stupid stuff or whatever), and intelligence tests (he can't stop thinking about her).  Physical skills are only affected conditionally.  Most of the time, they won't be.  The only major exception you might want to consider is combat.  I'd impose the penalty to Initiative and the first roll the PC makes in combat.  After that, fear for your life has a remarkably focusing quality, and you ditch the penalty.

Keep in mind that the skill penalty is a "metagame" thing.  In some cases, it doesn't make much sense, but it's still there to provide a mechanical consequence to failed Social tests.

The penalty generally only hangs around for a scene or so, or until something happens to nullify it.  In our running vampire/victim example, the victim might shake off the penalty by spending a DP, or by getting counter-seduced by one of his friends who he has a crush on.  And, of course, all bets are off when the vamp bites him, unless he's in to that kind of thing.

The penalties also don't stack up.  Only the highest result ever applies.  Even so, repeated attempts can wear down a PC's resistance, so I might cap the penalty at -5 or -7.  To keep the "dog pile effect" to a minimum, I'd also limit how many social rolls you can make in a given time frame; say one every 10 minutes or half-hour for extended things.

If the player chooses option A, he should almost always earn a Drama Point, and maybe a bonus XP if he plays it really well.

This system would also work on PC vs. PC social tests, but I generally try to avoid those in my game.  I'd rather have the players agree on those.  There's a difference in social perception between the GM/NPCs and another Player/PC that makes things more personal.

I suppose it'd also work for NPCs, but I would generally choose to have my NPCs choose Option A rather than juggling penalties and stuff.