Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A Player vs Player approach: Co-authorship
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6808741" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>That's quite likely.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Intentionally, because the problem has no OOC component. If the player is afraid of make believe dead things, or if the player has a qualms about whether he'd enjoy the dungeon crawling activity that is a different matter that can't be dealt with in character.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I find OOC communication is a bad habit. And what you've probably seen is groups that have the bad habit of doing most things OOC, and only do IC stuff when, to use the vernacular, "the <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> gets real". I've seen that too, and it comes from the bad habit of doing most things casually OOC and treating IC as escalation reserved only when you are going to threaten something. That's dysfunctional on so many levels, but yes, I've seen it. The more functional way to play is to do must stuff IC, and only break for OOC when its clear its become personal. </p><p></p><p>To a certain extent I've still got it. I've got a couple of players that only RP within the party when they are trying to bully other party members, usually acting on information they have OOC. But I assure you, if they tried to bully the other players OOC, it would only make the problem worse.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Figures.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Lots of experience watching groups trying to iron out difficulties. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What you are actually talking about is negotiation, usually between two people with incompatible desires so that they can't both get their way. Being open and honest about the fact that you are demanding to get your way over another person's objections involves more introspection than most people have. When you have a straight up conflict like this, going OOC to try to do the negotiations isn't likely to help because often both parties are being selfish and obstinate gits. What do you think this 'open and honest communication' actually sounds like?</p><p></p><p>Rarely have I had a situation where open and honest communication was the right approach. In the current campaign the only time I can think it came up was shortly after one of my players IRL father died, and he asked me as a player if we could put a story line on hold because it was cutting too close to home. That's an example of good open and honest OOC communication involving an OOC issue that effects play. Arguing OOC over something like whether its fair to pocket treasure for yourself at the expense of the party... yeah, that never works.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The only practical solution is to adopt that as a hard and fast rule. In general, IC conflicts should ALWAYS be dealt with IC - and as a GM if I see that rule is being broken I'll start nudging players. Likewise, OOC problems should always be dealt with OOC, and again, as a GM I'll start nudging if that gets broken.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry, but if that sort of thing is 'upsetting their player', the problem is with them principally. People screw up IC. People act selfishly IC. Grow up and deal with that fact. People learn. But if you are arguing that people ought to act on their OOC knowledge to interrupt things IC, yeah, I can't think of a better way to anger other players than that sort of "Sorry, but would you let me run your character for you" attitude.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6808741, member: 4937"] That's quite likely. Intentionally, because the problem has no OOC component. If the player is afraid of make believe dead things, or if the player has a qualms about whether he'd enjoy the dungeon crawling activity that is a different matter that can't be dealt with in character. I find OOC communication is a bad habit. And what you've probably seen is groups that have the bad habit of doing most things OOC, and only do IC stuff when, to use the vernacular, "the :):):):) gets real". I've seen that too, and it comes from the bad habit of doing most things casually OOC and treating IC as escalation reserved only when you are going to threaten something. That's dysfunctional on so many levels, but yes, I've seen it. The more functional way to play is to do must stuff IC, and only break for OOC when its clear its become personal. To a certain extent I've still got it. I've got a couple of players that only RP within the party when they are trying to bully other party members, usually acting on information they have OOC. But I assure you, if they tried to bully the other players OOC, it would only make the problem worse. Figures. Lots of experience watching groups trying to iron out difficulties. What you are actually talking about is negotiation, usually between two people with incompatible desires so that they can't both get their way. Being open and honest about the fact that you are demanding to get your way over another person's objections involves more introspection than most people have. When you have a straight up conflict like this, going OOC to try to do the negotiations isn't likely to help because often both parties are being selfish and obstinate gits. What do you think this 'open and honest communication' actually sounds like? Rarely have I had a situation where open and honest communication was the right approach. In the current campaign the only time I can think it came up was shortly after one of my players IRL father died, and he asked me as a player if we could put a story line on hold because it was cutting too close to home. That's an example of good open and honest OOC communication involving an OOC issue that effects play. Arguing OOC over something like whether its fair to pocket treasure for yourself at the expense of the party... yeah, that never works. The only practical solution is to adopt that as a hard and fast rule. In general, IC conflicts should ALWAYS be dealt with IC - and as a GM if I see that rule is being broken I'll start nudging players. Likewise, OOC problems should always be dealt with OOC, and again, as a GM I'll start nudging if that gets broken. Sorry, but if that sort of thing is 'upsetting their player', the problem is with them principally. People screw up IC. People act selfishly IC. Grow up and deal with that fact. People learn. But if you are arguing that people ought to act on their OOC knowledge to interrupt things IC, yeah, I can't think of a better way to anger other players than that sort of "Sorry, but would you let me run your character for you" attitude. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A Player vs Player approach: Co-authorship
Top