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

[Ralif Redhammer]

I agree with what others have said - the dice and PC decisions led to that outcome, and honoring both is important. Sometimes there are downer moments in gaming. But the thing about those moments is that they help to make the high parts higher.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Okay. Well, that's a pretty dark turn up.

@payn, I'm not sure what you're asking here. Make it better in what way? Sounds like the game got to a tough situation and that you and your players are perfectly cool with tough situations.

Is it the cold blooded murder that's bugging you?

 

[payn]

Okay. Well, that's a pretty dark turn up.

@payn, I'm not sure what you're asking here. Make it better in what way? Sounds like the game got to a tough situation and that you and your players are perfectly cool with tough situations.

Is it the cold blooded murder that's bugging you?

Not entirely, im just wondering if the chase would have been better than the catch. There certainly would have been better terms for the Travellers to work under in another system.

Frankly, im just considering what I could have done to set up better as a referee to avoid such situations, if possible. Wondering if letting the prey go to save the adventure would be a better move, or just let it go flat because that is how it shook out.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Well I guess you let the dice dictate the outcome of the story beat. Nothing wrong with that.

Here's some general theorising about how plots work themselves out. Hopefully I'll be able to pull it back around to your particular conundrum. Hopefully.


When we work out adventure plots we all of us come up with story beats in our head. They might be quite broad. "This will most likely be a fight." "This will most likely be a chase." They might be more specific. "This will be an RP heavy session with a lot of Bureaucracy checks and a potential deal with a mob boss." Maybe even "a deal with a mob boss they can't refuse."

How much we then commit to those story beats once the game is in play varies a lot. Some GMs really embrace the railroad. That is to say, the story beat, and its implied forward trajectory on the plot, takes priority. Others embrace letting the story emerge from the play, letting the dice fall as they will. Most of us, I suspect, vary in what we decide and how we decide it.

I believe such decisions are informed by the lead up to any given beat. They're also informed by other things such as a general play style, game rules, campaign set up, personal preference, and many other things I'm sure. But I want to to focus on the lead up to the story beat.

The lead up in the narrative can set things up in a way that we find ourselves committed to a given solution: plot or dice. For example, if the players have been particularly clever it seems harsh to not let them succeed, or conversely, if they've been particularly dense letting them do anything other than fail seems like giving them success on a platter. Either way, if we base our decision on one of those points, we have chosen plot. If the player's actions fall somewhere in between brilliant and ridiculous we may let the dice decide.

To put it another way (because I just thought of this and I like the sound of the phrase): How much diegetic momentum does a particular story beat have at the moment of its resolution? Because if a particular beat has a naughty word tonne of momentum doing anything other than the expected leads to some real dissonance in the fiction. (cf.: the end of Game of Thrones.) We may choose plot over dice so as to avoid this dissonance. If there's not a great deal of momentum we may feel that we don't have the right to make a decision over how it goes, so we choose dice over plot.

Then there's the meta- elements that come out of the build up to a story beat. Are people getting bored? Do they want some action? How long since we last had a combat? Does the ship weapons character need a chance to fire some ship's weapons? Do we owe our players some dice rolling? Do we owe our players some RP?


So... is it possible that you feel the outcome was unsatisfactory because the narrative was pointing one way but you found yourself going another? Because of reasons.

 

[payn]

Well I guess you let the dice dictate the outcome of the story beat. Nothing wrong with that.

Here's some general theorising about how plots work themselves out. Hopefully I'll be able to pull it back around to your particular conundrum. Hopefully.


When we work out adventure plots we all of us come up with story beats in our head. They might be quite broad. "This will most likely be a fight." "This will most likely be a chase." They might be more specific. "This will be an RP heavy session with a lot of Bureaucracy checks and a potential deal with a mob boss." Maybe even "a deal with a mob boss they can't refuse."

How much we then commit to those story beats once the game is in play varies a lot. Some GMs really embrace the railroad. That is to say, the story beat, and its implied forward trajectory on the plot, takes priority. Others embrace letting the story emerge from the play, letting the dice fall as they will. Most of us, I suspect, vary in what we decide and how we decide it.

I believe such decisions are informed by the lead up to any given beat. They're also informed by other things such as a general play style, game rules, campaign set up, personal preference, and many other things I'm sure. But I want to to focus on the lead up to the story beat.

The lead up in the narrative can set things up in a way that we find ourselves committed to a given solution: plot or dice. For example, if the players have been particularly clever it seems harsh to not let them succeed, or conversely, if they've been particularly dense letting them do anything other than fail seems like giving them success on a platter. Either way, if we base our decision on one of those points, we have chosen plot. If the player's actions fall somewhere in between brilliant and ridiculous we may let the dice decide.

To put it another way (because I just thought of this and I like the sound of the phrase): How much diegetic momentum does a particular story beat have at the moment of its resolution? Because if a particular beat has a naughty word tonne of momentum doing anything other than the expected leads to some real dissonance in the fiction. (cf.: the end of Game of Thrones.) We may choose plot over dice so as to avoid this dissonance. If there's not a great deal of momentum we may feel that we don't have the right to make a decision over how it goes, so we choose dice over plot.

Then there's the meta- elements that come out of the build up to a story beat. Are people getting bored? Do they want some action? How long since we last had a combat? Does the ship weapons character need a chance to fire some ship's weapons? Do we owe our players some dice rolling? Do we owe our players some RP?


So... is it possible that you feel the outcome was unsatisfactory because the narrative was pointing one way but you found yourself going another? Because of reasons.

I believe I might have been a bit distracted. I have a lot going on right now IRL outside the game. Normally, I keep a good account of everything going on in the game. I make sure that both the NPCs and the Travellers get to act in accordance with their knowledge and agendas. Some of that may have slipped, or went unmentioned on my part and I feel like the direction of the session may have suffered for it. I do have some ideas on how to proceed and make something of the story beats. The entire experience just had me questioning if maybe I should have in this rare case just forced the issue. Though, I am just thinking I need to be more mindful and on the ball in the future.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm very much with the playing to find out camp. I don't play traveller, so I could be missing important nuance here. And I think the GM should always have the right to intercede if dice make a really incongruous result (for example completely contradicting something that has already been established, or causing an NPC or group to do something they simply never would). But other than edge cases like that, I think rolling the dice is an important part of play. RPGs just lose something for me when there isn't that element of surprise and randomness from time to time (and the surprise isn't cleaved to by the group). I think sometimes the most unpleasant and disastrous results, yield the best material in their wake anyways.

That said, if there was some GM error on your part you felt made the result not particularly genuine, then I do think its fair for you to address that somehow (usually when I make an error as a GM, I tell my players about the error and ask if they want to keep things as is or undo what just happened). I think if Gm error is involved in GM partiality, you really need to make an effort to preserve that impartiality by being transparent and clear about what just happened. I mentioned this elsewhere I think, but in an adventure I ran the other day, totally different system, modern horror, the players killed a vampire by pulling down the blinds and letting the sun in. The only problem was, I was still midnight and I forgot to properly track and convey time to them. One of the players pointed out the error, and I acknowledged it and asked if they wanted to keep the results or redu it. It was in their favor so keeping it wasn't too hard, but the mistake was on me (just had a mental glitch where my brain suddenly imagined the sun being out for no reason, and I conveyed to them that the sun was out---at a time in the adventure when it absolutely would not have been)

 

[payn]

I'm very much with the playing to find out camp. I don't play traveller, so I could be missing important nuance here. And I think the GM should always have the right to intercede if dice make a really incongruous result (for example completely contradicting something that has already been established, or causing an NPC or group to do something they simply never would). But other than edge cases like that, I think rolling the dice is an important part of play. RPGs just lose something for me when there isn't that element of surprise and randomness from time to time (and the surprise isn't cleaved to by the group). I think sometimes the most unpleasant and disastrous results, yield the best material in their wake anyways.

That said, if there was some GM error on your part you felt made the result not particularly genuine, then I do think its fair for you to address that somehow (usually when I make an error as a GM, I tell my players about the error and ask if they want to keep things as is or undo what just happened). I think if Gm error is involved in GM partiality, you really need to make an effort to preserve that impartiality by being transparent and clear about what just happened. I mentioned this elsewhere I think, but in an adventure I ran the other day, totally different system, modern horror, the players killed a vampire by pulling down the blinds and letting the sun in. The only problem was, I was still midnight and I forgot to properly track and convey time to them. One of the players pointed out the error, and I acknowledged it and asked if they wanted to keep the results or redu it. It was in their favor so keeping it wasn't too hard, but the mistake was on me (just had a mental glitch where my brain suddenly imagined the sun being out for no reason, and I conveyed to them that the sun was out---at a time in the adventure when it absolutely would not have been)

I dont think it was misapplication of the rules as GM. I think it was more situation setup that allowed some choices of the rules to be taken when perhaps they would have been different. For example, I could have given the runaway scientist more of a head start giving her an even greater chance of escape. Though, to be fair to the NPC and Travellers they scored a lucky hit to the jump drive making an early jump impossible. I also, could have had the local security force radio the Travellers during the fight. That would have reminded them about how they certainly did not want the scientist to fall into their hands.

Ultimately, I think I just boxed myself in a corner and it was like a waterfall. This happens on occasion, and there is usually an out for both the Travellers and the NPCs, but it just sort of collapsed into a disappointing finish this time. Probably, being too hard on myself. No Traveller bought the farm or lost anything, the story can continue, I'm just beating myself up about it.

 

[pointofyou]

I dont think it was misapplication of the rules as GM. I think it was more situation setup that allowed some choices of the rules to be taken when perhaps they would have been different. For example, I could have given the runaway scientist more of a head start giving her an even greater chance of escape. Though, to be fair to the NPC and Travellers they scored a lucky hit to the jump drive making an early jump impossible. I also, could have had the local security force radio the Travellers during the fight. That would have reminded them about how they certainly did not want the scientist to fall into their hands.

Ultimately, I think I just boxed myself in a corner and it was like a waterfall. This happens on occasion, and there is usually an out for both the Travellers and the NPCs, but it just sort of collapsed into a disappointing finish this time. Probably, being too hard on myself. No Traveller bought the farm or lost anything, the story can continue, I'm just beating myself up about it.

If you are operating under the not-unusual expectation the PCs will be heroes it makes sense the outcome here would generate some cognitive dissonance. It can be difficult to square that expectation with the sort of decisions your PCs made here.

 

[payn]

If you are operating under the not-unusual expectation the PCs will be heroes it makes sense the outcome here would generate some cognitive dissonance. It can be difficult to square that expectation with the sort of decisions your PCs made here.

Oh yeah. The Travllers were pretty split. A few of them did not want to take this action, and a few of them were rather pragmatic about it. I dont interfere or put any expectations on them. If this same outcome came about after an excellent adventure, I would not be posting about it. I feel like the adventure was cut short, and the ending was disappointing. I am trying to talk out my role in that and how to be better in the future. Ultimately, I think im glad I didnt force any story, even if it would have improved the adventure. I dont want the players to feel railroaded and/or cheated.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I believe I might have been a bit distracted. I have a lot going on right now IRL outside the game. Normally, I keep a good account of everything going on in the game. I make sure that both the NPCs and the Travellers get to act in accordance with their knowledge and agendas. Some of that may have slipped, or went unmentioned on my part and I feel like the direction of the session may have suffered for it. I do have some ideas on how to proceed and make something of the story beats. The entire experience just had me questioning if maybe I should have in this rare case just forced the issue. Though, I am just thinking I need to be more mindful and on the ball in the future.

I hear that. Over the years there's been more than a few times where stupid real life had me distracted such that I messed up my GMing.

I dont think it was misapplication of the rules as GM. I think it was more situation setup that allowed some choices of the rules to be taken when perhaps they would have been different. For example, I could have given the runaway scientist more of a head start giving her an even greater chance of escape. Though, to be fair to the NPC and Travellers they scored a lucky hit to the jump drive making an early jump impossible. I also, could have had the local security force radio the Travellers during the fight. That would have reminded them about how they certainly did not want the scientist to fall into their hands.

Ultimately, I think I just boxed myself in a corner and it was like a waterfall. This happens on occasion, and there is usually an out for both the Travellers and the NPCs, but it just sort of collapsed into a disappointing finish this time. Probably, being too hard on myself. No Traveller bought the farm or lost anything, the story can continue, I'm just beating myself up about it.

I was going to ask how you arrived at the scientist's lead being was what it was. And how the cops arrival being was what it was.

Yeah, chalk this one up to just being a bit distracted. As you've said, no major damage was done to the campaign. Hope that real life crap clears up soon.

Cheers.