Negotiations and the Disposition System - A Simple Homebrew Framework for running Structured Social Encounters

Hello beautiful people! Below you will find my simple homebrew system for running structured social encounters in D&D. It is heavily inspired by MCDM's similar system, but it simplifies it even further for easy use at the table. Please let me know how you find it, and if it has helped you run better and more meaningful social encounters with your groups. Enjoy! :)

Negotiations

Negotiations is a homebrew framework made to give more structure and inspiration to social encounters that are important to the story of the game. The system is designed to be easy to understand and run. It is based on a simple concept called Disposition which models a character's attitude towards the players on a specific topic and at a specific point in time.

The Disposition System

An NPC with which the party negotiates is given a number from 1 to 5, called the disposition of said NPC towards the party at this moment in time. The lower the number, the more negatively disposed this character is towards the heroes. In short:

The Structure of a Negotiation

The negotiation has a set number of rounds over which it unfolds, determined by the DM before the negotiation starts. In each round, the NPC and the party go back and forth exchanging arguments. Arguments can change the disposition of the NPC, increasing or decreasing its numerical value. A round is over when an NPC's disposition changes either because the players made an attempt to (such as when presenting an argument and making a skill check) or because new information came to light that did (such as when the NPC learns something shocking about the party or figures out a lie they have told him).
In most cases, the goal of the party should be to get this number as high as possible, so that the negotiation is successful and they get what they asked for.

Skill checks

When an argument is made that can sway the disposition of the NPC, the DM can call for a skill check based on the nature of the argument.[1] The DC of the check is decided by the DM, and is usually influenced by how good of an argument the party presents: an argument that is perfectly aligned with the opinions of the NPC can be considered an easy check (DC 10), whereas an argument that does not fit the NPC's views at all might be considered a hard check (DC 20). A successful check raises the disposition of the NPC by one point, whereas a failed one can lower the disposition by one point if the check failed by 3 or more points (for example, on a DC 14 the party rolled a 9).

Critical Successes and Failures

An NPC might have very strong views on some subjects; for example, a paladin might have honor and the preservation of human life as top priority. When appealing to these strong views, the heroes make an attempt at the NPC's soft spots and aversions.
At the DM's discretion, a particular argument the party makes that touches on a soft spot or aversion can sway the NPC's opinion by two points. The outcomes of these checks are called critical successes or critical failures. Also, a natural 20 or natural 1 on any skill check, even when not touching on a soft spot or aversion, can optionally be considered a critical success or a critical failure respectively.

Ending the Negotiation

There are three ways to end a negotiation:

• the disposition of the NPC falls below 1;
• the disposition of the NPC goes above 5;
• the set number of rounds for the negotiation is reached.

At the end of the negotiation, the DM resolves the outcome based on the current disposition of the NPC. Consult the table at the beginning of the section for some guidance on what each number means.[2]

An Example Negotiation

A party of three needs more information on a legendary item that will help them in their quest to slay the red dragon that's been terrorizing the local area. They decide to visit a sphinx, Aethryss, in her lair and have her cast legend lore on their behalf. The DM decides that this is a social encounter worthy of running as a negotiation: it is important to the story of the adventure, and the sphinx will not readily cast a high level spell for a party she doesn't know or trust.

Having fleshed out Aethryss' character as an NPC, the DM knows that the sphinx's soft spot is duty towards higher powers, whereas her aversion is actions that go against the will of the gods. The DM also decides that Aethryss' starting disposition is a 2, given that the sphinx is currently searching for her lost mate and not in the mood to deal with other irrelevant things; he also gives the negotiation 4 rounds to conclude.
Start of the negotiation:
The negotiation starts when the party mentions to the sphinx that they want her to cast legend lore for them and locate the legendary dragon-slaying sword.
Round 1:
Aethryss: She questions why she should bother helping the party in the first place.
Party: The sorcerer of the group (who has the highest Charisma of all the party members) takes the lead and says that they do this for the good and livelihood of the people terrorized by the red dragon.
Since this particular sphinx is good-aligned, but the argument does not appeal to her very much, the DM asks for a DC 17 Persuasion check. The sorcerer manages to make the check, bringing Aethryss' disposition to 3.
Round 2:
Aethryss: The sphinx asks where the party learned about the existence of the dragon-slaying sword in the first place.
Party: The party mentions that an aboleth gave them this info as the reward for a quest they did for the creature.
Since aboleths are creatures that actively search for ways to destroy the gods, Aethryss is infuriated (her aversion has been triggered). Without asking for any check, the sphinx's disposition immediately drops by two points, bringing it to 1.
Round 3:
Party: The sorcerer rebuts that the aboleth alignment was a necessary evil in their quest to heed the king's call for aid. Given the chance, they would go back to the aboleth's lair and kill the scheming creature, but they first have to help the king protect his kingdom from the red dragon.
This appeals to Aethryss' soft spot. The DM decides that this is a chance for a critical success and calls for a DC 10 Persuasion check. The sorcerer effortlessly makes the check, and raises the disposition of the sphinx by two points, bringing it back to a total of 3.
Round 4:
Aethryss: The sphinx is concerned that the party is not capable to deal with the situation. If the legendary sword falls to the hands of the unworthy, it might mean a lost chance for someone worthy to wield it and defeat the dragon.
Party: The barbarian claims that the heroes are strong enough to defeat the dragon given the artifact. He picks up a loose boulder inside the sphinx's temple and tosses it to display his physical prowess.
The DM likes the idea, and believes Aethryss could reasonably be impressed by a good enough throw. He calls for a DC 15 Athletics check. The barbarian rolls a 13, which is not enough to pass but also not so low that the sphinx's disposition would drop. Aethryss' disposition remains at 3.
End of the negotiation:
With four rounds having passed, the negotiation scene has concluded. The DM announces that the sphinx has no more interest in continuing the conversation, and that she wants to go on searching for her lost mate. With a result of 3 (Neutral) Aethryss won't give the party exactly what they asked for (the casting of legend lore) but she is willing to give them a scroll of legend lore from her lair's library. The party can't cast this spell on their own, however they do know of a friendly bard back in town who can cast it off the scroll for them, so they leave the sphinx's lair with the spell scroll.

Negotiations can be as simple or as complex as you want them to be. This was an example of a short negotiation, which may have involved more than four sentences by each side in actual gameplay. Try to keep your negotiations dynamic, exciting and to-the-point. A good negotiation feels like a combat encounter, only with fewer dice rolls.

FAQ

Q: Do all social encounters need to be run as negotiations?
A: No. Only those you think will enhance the game experience for your table. It is the same with combats: not all combat encounters need to conform to the combat rules of the game. As a rule of thumb: if a social encounter is not important to the story (such as asking for a drink in a tavern) or has a negligible chance of not going the way of the party (such as when the party asks for a small favor from the local friendly bard), then it is probably a good idea to not turn the social encounter into a negotiation.

Q: How many rounds does typically one allow for a negotiation?
A: As many as you want. The golden rule to keep in mind is: what will make for the best game experience for the table? Do I want a high-stakes, intense negotiation? Then probably I should allow for as few as three rounds for it. Do I want a long, hard negotiation with many chances for the outcome to be swayed? Then probably I should allow for as high as ten rounds for it.
Tip: You may want to rethink the set number of rounds if this goes outside the boundaries of 3 and 10.

Q: Do I always need a check for the disposition of the NPC to change?
A: The answer should be obvious to any good DM: no. If a situation is clear-cut, you do not need to ask for a check; simply resolve it the way you see fit. In round 2 of the example negotiation above, mentioning something so outrageous to the sphinx is enough for her disposition to drop by 2 without any check.

Q: Can't the characters end a negotiation early, before reaching the set number of rounds or having an outstanding disposition score?
A: Sure they can. In RPGs, the game can take any turn you and your players come up with. Just make sure to keep in mind what this means: ending a negotiation early on a score of 5 means that you shut the door to the possibility that the NPC discovers something nasty about the party, something that would make them not want to help at all; ending the conversation on a score of 2 means the party leaves from the negotiation empty-handed and usually no progress has been made towards their goal.

Q: Can't anything be done to change the outcome of a negotiation when that has concluded?
A: Don't feel bounded by any system you put in place if you feel the story should go another way. Characters may try to persuade NPCs even after a negotiation is over; give them the chance to achieve it if that makes for a better story. Do keep in mind though that adhering to the outcome of the negotiation might make for an even better story than the one you initially planned for.
As a follow-up question: how would you feel continuing a combat encounter whose outcome has been decided by the rules of the game?

Footnotes:

1. The most usual types of skill checks to call for in a negotiation are Charisma-based skill checks, such as Persuasion or Deception. However, to keep the negotiations inclusive for all characters, try to have an open mind on what the heroes can attempt in order to change the attitude of the NPC. For example, a barbarian can display their enormous strength to the NPC in order to showcase that they are indeed capable of carrying out the mission; this would require an Athletics check. Or a wizard might try to call upon the pacts forged between the peoples of old and bring the NPC to their side; this would require a History check.

2. Outstanding disposition numbers should also incur outstanding outcomes. A disposition that is less than 1 could mean that the NPC takes extreme measures against the party; a countess may shut the door on the heroes' faces, a king may call the guards on them, or a god may outright banish a character to the Nine Hells to punish them for their insults. On the other hand, a disposition of more than 5 could mean that the NPC goes out of their way to help the party; a fellow adventurer may offer one of his rare magic items to help the heroes with their mission, a warlock may decide to burn one of their precious scrolls to cast a spell for the party, or a drow matron may redirect one of her armies to aid the characters sneak into enemy territory.

Seems fine! But I'll rather make it a social fight with saving throw and damage. I created a few social combat actions...