Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group

[WisestMongoloid]

So, in a recent session, I (a newbie SW GM) had a Wild Card NPC that had just seen 2 out of his three body guards taken down by the 2 PCs in the first round of combat due to some very luck dice rolls. The Wild Card NPC had "sat out" the first round of combat (although he was dealt in), because he wanted to "assess the PCs' fighting prowess". At the start of the second round, one of the PCs decides to ask the Wild Card NPC for surrender, which I was not prepared for. She didn't have the Intimidation skill to do a proper "Test of Wills", but she did have the Persuasion skill. So, she asked whether or not she could persuade the Wild Card NPC to surrender. I said sure (since it made sense storywise given what had just happened), do a Persuasion roll and see what happens. She succeeded and the Wild Card NPC surrendered, calling off the last of his bodyguards.

Although my players were happy with how I played that out, this situation got me thinking. Is there a proper "surrendering" mechanic in SW? Is that mostly done "out of combat", so that if a non-combat skill roll (like Persuasion) fails or the roleplaying fails, we continue combat? I am assuming, in this case, that the PC would be on Hold while the "out of combat" Persuasion occurs, so that she can get back into combat if the Persuasion attempt fails.

Should the Persuasion attempt in this case have been opposed? Against what? Afterwards I was thinking I should have opposed it with a Spirit or Smarts roll, but I don't know if that was really necessary (it feels like a house rule, since Persuasion is not typically opposed). The main reason for this was because I was not sure if a single Persuasion success could cause someone to surrender. I don't want that in her toolkit from now on.

What would happen if the roles were reversed? If the NPCs were winning, and the Wild Card NPC asks for the surrender? Is that all roleplaying and handled "out of combat" with the NPCs on Hold waiting for the PC answer?

What would happen if the PCs agreed to the surrender but they wanted to play it out as a "fake" surrender?

Sorry for the multitude of questions

[Enno]

It is called "roleplaying" for a reason, isn't it?!

For "surrender mechanics" we have spirit rolls for morale. We have simple Persuasion rolls, Intimidation rolls, fear, Tests of will, smarts tricks, that will all do the thing depending on the circumstances. Take your pick!

And we have simple roleplaying....
_________________
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who know binary and those who don't.

[WisestMongoloid]

Reading over my own post, it makes me realize that, in that particular situation, I think I made a mistake allowing the Persuasion roll to happen. I should have just let the role playing take care of the situation, which would have resulted in the NPC Wild Card surrendering after seeing his crew get pummeled in one round. Sigh... GM inexperience The player asked and I said "Sure! Why not!?".

In general, however, the more generic question here I think is whether or not there is a proper mechanic to "pause" combat to allow for non-combat interactions to take place, and to resume combat if those interactions do not result in stopping the combat.

Thanks again...

[kaltorak]

In Triple Aces Games Daring Tales of Adventure series there is a specific paragraph on surrendering.
Being the rules of DTA a free download, I can summarize them:
Pulp, as genre, certain times requires the heroes to be captured and/or to surrender. To reward the players in following the trope, when they surrender they are rewarded with a Bennie.

It isn't really a "mechanic" to force the players to surrender (a thing many players would hate), but more a "suggestion" .

[Enno]

[Sadric]

I would say that its a oposed roll, persuassion against Spirit, maybe even the persuassion (or taunt or intimidate) of the leader.

once I've done something like this (but more combatants involved) based on the mass combat rules.

A prou Mercenary leader+his experience men protect a lunatic noble.

The speaker of the Charakters have tokens based on his spirit, the enemy mercenary leader based on his spirit.

Then the charakter and the enemy chief (not the mercenary leader) use persuassion/intimidate/taunt to reduce the others token. This rolls count as actions, so some other played helped with multi-action penaltys while still fighting. If someone reached 0 counters the negotations are cancelled or the mercenarys surrender.

The enemy chief even "bought" some tokens back with promise of more gold. It was cool because the fight surge around them while they negotiate, but the arguments get stale after a few rounds ("but, you KNOW he is STILL complet lunatic").

Next time I need to involve the tide of the fight somehow in the rolls.

[Zadmar]

[xxlgeeklord]

You could allow the player to roleplay it and make it a Persuasion roll with a modifier based on what she says. That's how we do it at my table.

[Lord Stone]

[Clint]

You handled it exactly by the rules. You were the GM and you made the call that felt right at the time. That's really all there is.

It could have been pure roleplaying, it could have been purely based on a roll, or as you did it, it could be a combination of the two.

Honestly, the fact that the player asked for a roll is one of the best reasons to use a roll in that case. They want to apply their skill and they are willing to let the dice decide the outcome because of the tension and drama it gives the situation. They could succeed or they could fail or even critically fail, or they could get a raise or beyond for an extraordinary effect. Dice and roleplaying aren't opposite values; it's very possible for dice to springboard into even better roleplaying.

The decision whether dice should rule, assist, or be avoided in these situations is something the GM can only really make when the situation occurs. You did that, and it sounds like you made a great call for that situation. Just use that same flexibility and common sense in any future situations, and you've pretty much got "the rules" down.

Only thing I'd say is not to force the PCs toward actions by using Persuasion against them. Let them decide their own actions, though perhaps a Notice vs. Persuasion will let them know if the foe intends to honor the surrender terms.

Hope that helps.
_________________
Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

www.peginc.com

[77IM]

Sometimes, as a GM, I have trouble figuring out just what the NPC might do. Humans are complicated and I tend to create conflicted NPCs with contradictory desires. So often I'll apply this little trick:

1. The PCs make their arguments and make a skill check, with a bonus if it's a good argument (like "I just killed all your doods").
   
2. The NPC's "inner voice" makes a counter-argument, again with a bonus if it's good. Their check is a Spirit check (for things they don't want to do, or fear) or a Smarts check (for things they don't believe, or don't think is a good idea).
   
3. Whichever rolls higher, decides what the NPC does. On a raise, they are firm/enthusiastic about their decision.
   
4. This is the best part -- if you want to extend the dialog, use the Social Conflict rules from SWD. Let the PCs make 3 separate arguments, with a check for each, and the NPC gets a counter-check too. Then refer to the results table to see how much they are swayed.

Having that process to go through helps me to clarify my thoughts and play the NPCs a little more believably. Because there's a random roll involved, they won't stonewall the PCs but won't roll right over for them, either.

-- 77IM
_________________
Stuff I made: Arcane Abilities · Talent Edge · Savage Fading Suns · Savage Wuxia!

[WisestMongoloid]

Thank you all for the thoughtful responses. I feel very lucky to have experienced GMs like yourselves willing to take the time to answer newbie questions .

I am starting to understand now the options that I have available. My initial worry stemmed from the fact that I thought the Persuader PC was going to, every time we had combat, to try to persuade the NPC leader to surrender I didn't have a way to counter that. But I see now the variety of options in my tool bag: role play it, opposed rolls, modifiers to the Persuasion roll, Mass Combat alternative, etc. Wow... Freaking awesome

In terms of pausing combat to allow for non-combat interactions to happen, I am also starting to understand some of the options there. If I had to do it again, I was thinking it would be fun to do it as follows (which, as you all pointed out, is just one way of many): 1) the Persuader PC goes on Hold while attempting the Persuasion during her turn, 2) if the Wild Card NPC turn occurs later in the round, he does not respond until his initiative card comes up, allowing some more combat before he had to make the decision, which may change the situation, 3a) If the Wild Card NPC surrenders, we get out of combat, 3b) If the Wild Card NPC does not surrender, we continue combat and the Persuader PC, who was on hold, can attempt interrupts, etc.

Thanks again!

[warrenss2]

[Sean-Khan]

[The Dread Polack]

It is my sincere opinion that characters, both PCs and NPCs don't surrender nearly enough. It takes quite a bit to work up a person or animal to the point where it's willing to fight to the death. And, those situations, in my experience, rarely come up in RPGs.

Depending on the game, I have a general idea of at what HP or wound level a character is willing to continue fighting, and depending on how things go in the fight, they will either flee or surrender. In SW, if Wildcards are lucky enough to take two or three wounds only, then they will almost always give up. Bandit types will try to run away, or surrender if they have to. Most of the time, their goal isn't worth their life.

The exceptions, of course, are cornered animals, zombies, fanatics, robots, etc. I try to make sure my PCs fight some of those every now and then as well.

It's funny how this can surprise players sometimes. They're faced with the decision of what to do with defeated foe who's actually still alive.

Anyway, if I had been in your position, I would have likely had the NPC surrender immediately, without calling for a roll. A persuasion roll might be appropriate for negotiating the terms of the surrender.

And as for PCs: I agree with what has been said. I would never force a PC to surrender, but a persuasion roll would give them an idea of what the consequences of their decision would be, as well as the sincerity of the terms given. At that point, the players choose and face the consequences. I like the idea of giving the players a benny for surrendering.

[tigerguy786]

I haven't been GMing very long, but the one time I had an NPC group surrender the Bloodthirsty character played to his hindrance and wouldn't let them. :/
_________________
TIGER, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?