GM Partiality. To be, or not to be...

[payn]

Greetings,

I am currently running a Traveller sandbox game for some friends. We just got done with a session. The results have me a little down. Not because of of any particular playstyle or rules disagreement, it was just how the dice fell and how the story played out.

Here is the scenario;
The Travellers were pursuing a runaway scientist infected with some nasty nanotechnology. She wasn't in her right mind, yet still quite a capable challenge. She was trying to flee the system and go on a mission that could have had disastrous results. Normally, this scientist wouldn't be so rash and reckless. In this case she stole a ship and was making way for a jump point outside the systems gravity well. The Travellers were in pursuit with a faster ship and were able to fire a series of rounds on the scientist's stolen ship. The scientist was just one round away from jumping into a new system when the Travellers were able to disable the ship. The Travellers boarded and were able to talk the scientist into surrendering and offering her help. They placed her in an isolation chamber while unconscious in their care.

Here is where things get complicated. The doctor was doing research for both the local govt and the Travellers. However, the system defense and security is run entirely by a megarcorporation that keeps a tight grip on the system. With the scientists ship out of commission and her on board, the system defense boats were finally in approach. The local security chief was demanding to have the prisoner turned over to them. The Travellers convinced the chief that it would be safer for them to transport the prisoner back to the station because of her infected state. The chief said he would escort them back. The Travellers had three choices. Hand the scientist over to the megacorp, potentially allowing them to interrogate her and discover secrets that would have been bad for the local science council and the Travellers. Burn hard and jump out of system with the scientist, becoming wanted in the system and landing on the megacrops craplist. Finally, take out the scientist in her sleep and destroy the nanotech, turn over the body and say she expired from injuries in the fire fight.

The Travellers chose option 3, and it felt really sh@#$y. I mean, it was a logical choice, it would have been bad to turn her over for a lot of people. It was a solid roleplay session, but man did it feel like a downer.

Now, this adventure could have turned out a lot different had the scientist made the jump and the pursuit continued away from the system. She just couldn't make it by the rules and how the dice fell. I, as referee, stuck to it and let happen what the dice and rules say should happen. Should I have? Could the adventure been much better off that way? Would I have felt worse forcing an outcome on the players, even though they likely would have gone with it and enjoyed it anyways?

I have ideas how to continue this adventure in the future with characters still around. I really want to make an impact on this decision and for the NPC that was lost. Something both the players and I would really enjoy after such a tough session. I'm just wondering if I could have done things to make it better? Or do you sometimes have to just live with what comes out in the dice?

 

[pointofyou]

I think sticking with the outcome of play was the right choice here. I have generally found it better to deal with the outcomes of the choices as they fell out around the table than to try to arrange things to my own preferences. You can always bounce new ideas off of repercussions or other downstream results of the decisions your PCs have made.

 

[RivetGeekWil]

I wouldn't call it impartiality. I call it having no expectations. You play to find out what happens, and respect the results of the dice when they are brought out. It's when you decide that she should get away, or she should get captured, and start bending things to go that direction that you're getting into trouble.

 

[hawkeyefan]

@payn I think you made the right call. There being consequences to player decisions is an important part of RPGs. And even if we can imagine things going equally well or maybe even better if you’d made a different decision, we can also imagine them going worse.

 

[Teo Twawki]

On one hand, there's the argument that dice and rules shouldn't prevent a satisfying game session.

On the other cephalopod--and as someone here already noted--there is also not holding onto expectations about what a story should do and allowing the story to unfold as it will, with player character choices & decisions being the principle determining factors in that unfolding. Along with random dice rolls.

As such, great stories usually have character death in them. And if when that character death occurs, if it is not emotionally-moving, then that character's life really wasn't worth much. q.v. red shirts v. Spock's death

As a group, we don't set out to kill our own or each other's characters (nor NPCs). But it happens often enough. When the character or NPC is particularly notable, we usually have an in-game memorial of some sort for them. And an out-of-game proverbial feast hall of the dead.

 

[niklinna]

I might add to the above, don't let that thread of your overall story just end with the NPC's death. It probably has consequences. What might they be, and how will they come 'round to affect the player characters?

 

[overgeeked]

Now, this adventure could have turned out a lot different had the scientist made the jump and the pursuit continued away from the system. She just couldn't make it by the rules and how the dice fell. I, as referee, stuck to it and let happen what the dice and rules say should happen. Should I have?

Yes, absolutely.

Could the adventure been much better off that way?

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. The best adventure is following the PCs choices and going with whatever the logical consequences for those choices are. If the world and fiction don't feel like they're plausible, it all falls apart. Verisimilitude is king.

Would I have felt worse forcing an outcome on the players, even though they likely would have gone with it and enjoyed it anyways?

I think you'd feel worse. The whole point of having players is so they can make choices. The whole point of playing RPGs is to be able to make those choices. If they don't have choices and/or those choices don't actually matter, then there's no point calling it an RPG. They might have gone along with a railroad, but they very likely would not have enjoyed it.

I have ideas how to continue this adventure in the future with characters still around. I really want to make an impact on this decision and for the NPC that was lost. Something both the players and I would really enjoy after such a tough session.

Was it a tough session because they made a choice you didn't like or because it was an actually bad choice? If you and the players don't like tough moral choices, don't put them in the game.

I'm just wondering if I could have done things to make it better?

Better for who?

Or do you sometimes have to just live with what comes out in the dice?

In my opinion, you always have to "just live with" what the player choices and dice and rules tell you the outcome is. If a character dies unless they roll an 8 or better, then they need to die if the dice come up 4. It's as simple as that. It's not the referee's job to push certain player choices or pad the narrative to protect the PCs nor is it the referee's job to force the emergent story to go any particular way. It's up to the referee to create the world and fill it with obstacles and challenges, then let the PCs loose in that world. Sit back and watch the PCs bounce off things, knock dominoes over, and wait for the consequences to pile up. You're not writing a novel. You shouldn't have a predetermined end in mind.

 

[Composer99]

The only way I think you could have made the wrong call is if both of the following are true:
(1) You and your players had a mostly or entirely unenjoyable/unsatisfying/unfun game session, and you can trace that lack back to your decision.
(2) Your decision on how to handle the situation was out of line with your gameplay preferences and, to a lesser extent, your players' gameplay preferences.

It doesn't sound as if either of those is the case, though, so to my mind all is well.

 

[billd91]

Greetings,

I am currently running a Traveller sandbox game for some friends. We just got done with a session. The results have me a little down. Not because of of any particular playstyle or rules disagreement, it was just how the dice fell and how the story played out.

Here is the scenario;
The Travellers were pursuing a runaway scientist infected with some nasty nanotechnology. She wasn't in her right mind, yet still quite a capable challenge. She was trying to flee the system and go on a mission that could have had disastrous results. Normally, this scientist wouldn't be so rash and reckless. In this case she stole a ship and was making way for a jump point outside the systems gravity well. The Travellers were in pursuit with a faster ship and were able to fire a series of rounds on the scientist's stolen ship. The scientist was just one round away from jumping into a new system when the Travellers were able to disable the ship. The Travellers boarded and were able to talk the scientist into surrendering and offering her help. They placed her in an isolation chamber while unconscious in their care.

Here is where things get complicated. The doctor was doing research for both the local govt and the Travellers. However, the system defense and security is run entirely by a megarcorporation that keeps a tight grip on the system. With the scientists ship out of commission and her on board, the system defense boats were finally in approach. The local security chief was demanding to have the prisoner turned over to them. The Travellers convinced the chief that it would be safer for them to transport the prisoner back to the station because of her infected state. The chief said he would escort them back. The Travellers had three choices. Hand the scientist over to the megacorp, potentially allowing them to interrogate her and discover secrets that would have been bad for the local science council and the Travellers. Burn hard and jump out of system with the scientist, becoming wanted in the system and landing on the megacrops craplist. Finally, take out the scientist in her sleep and destroy the nanotech, turn over the body and say she expired from injuries in the fire fight.

The Travellers chose option 3, and it felt really sh@#$y. I mean, it was a logical choice, it would have been bad to turn her over for a lot of people. It was a solid roleplay session, but man did it feel like a downer.

Now, this adventure could have turned out a lot different had the scientist made the jump and the pursuit continued away from the system. She just couldn't make it by the rules and how the dice fell. I, as referee, stuck to it and let happen what the dice and rules say should happen. Should I have? Could the adventure been much better off that way? Would I have felt worse forcing an outcome on the players, even though they likely would have gone with it and enjoyed it anyways?

I have ideas how to continue this adventure in the future with characters still around. I really want to make an impact on this decision and for the NPC that was lost. Something both the players and I would really enjoy after such a tough session. I'm just wondering if I could have done things to make it better? Or do you sometimes have to just live with what comes out in the dice?

Whoa! She surrendered with them offering help, and then they ultimately murder her to stay on the good side of the megacorp?!? That's a DARK turn. I can see that making you feel kind of bad and maybe wistfully wishing you'd allowed her to jump out of system so they wouldn't have made that decision. I'd feel kind of bad about my players taking that step because of the situation I had set up (system defense boats approaching, risk of going on the run, etc).
But, yeah, you didn't know they were going to do that when the dice determined that her ship had been disabled. Honestly, I'd play up the consequences of their murder of the scientist. Probably not too much from the megacorp angle (but they should demand the body and what happens when they discover the nanotech has been destroyed?), but from other scientists and the local government, maybe her family.

 

[payn]

Whoa! She surrendered with them offering help, and then they ultimately murder her to stay on the good side of the megacorp?!? That's a DARK turn. I can see that making you feel kind of bad and maybe wistfully wishing you'd allowed her to jump out of system so they wouldn't have made that decision. I'd feel kind of bad about my players taking that step because of the situation I had set up (system defense boats approaching, risk of going on the run, etc).
But, yeah, you didn't know they were going to do that when the dice determined that her ship had been disabled. Honestly, I'd play up the consequences of their murder of the scientist. Probably not too much from the megacorp angle (but they should demand the body and what happens when they discover the nanotech has been destroyed?), but from other scientists and the local government, maybe her family.

Not entirely their fault, an NPC was along for the ride that offered to take out the scientist. So, it wasn't entirely the players decision. The NPC very much did not want the scientist to fall into the hands of the megacorp. Also, the NPC did not want to be a fugitive in their home system. So, the NPC offered to finish her off instead as an alternative, but ultimately it was the crews decision.

The Travellers were about to jump and go on the run when they thought the NPC was making some sense. I felt I wouldn't have been playing the NPC fairly if I had him just clam up and not give his two credits. The NPC is also not what he seems as just a lowly scientist's assistant. The Travellers seem aware now that something is up with this guy and ended the session wanting to keep tabs on him.

Wasn't a great feeling session, but my head is swimming with ideas for the future to hopefully make something out of this.