Simon Hibbs
I sympathise with the general sentiment, but I think you are taking
this to an extreme. >>
I am on the Hibbs side of this one. It could depend on your definition of intrigue, and your timescales. For example in Cunning Knellist spends three months befriending the son of Chief Goldbags in order to get easy access to the Chiefs treasure trove is this best resolved by the players and GM spending three months actually befriending each other, doing things that we might imagine a young chief's son might take to be 'befriending', playing out a few examples, just saying we are doing it and letting the Gm decide if it works, or using our 'befriend young people with devious lies' 18WW skill against the 'I'm suspicious of anyone called 'cunning'' 15W skill of the boys mother?
Similarly, it is very difficult to detect of someone is 'actually' telling the truth in a RPG environment if their character is supposed to be lying because the player has nothing to be guilty about. I believe that these are just two legitimate examples where actually 'acting' it out doesn't cut the mustard, and that a game mechanic is more appropriate. Personal interactions'that are difficut to resolve might include:
Seduction
Lying
Debating things the players know nothing about
Debating things the character know little about but the players do.
Intimidation
Sycophancy
Utter conviction.
If, by 'Intrigue' you are talking about the complicated plots that can devolop then they can obviously be done without mechanics BUT personal interaction does benefit from game mechanics (IMO). Besides, the HW mechanic does should you come up with actions appropriate to your wager. ("I'll risk everything to seduce the Queen by waiting for her, naked, in her bedroom" uh oh Big Failure!)
Keith N
Powered by hypermail