Players choose what their PCs do . . .

Ovinomancer · Jul 4, 2019

Nagol said:
Absolutely! And much like the player's version is assuming facts not in evidence, so is the GM! Perhaps she isn't the right type, right gender, or right species! Perhaps the PC has a one true love and will not be swayed, perhaps... so many possibilities. I have trained my players well enough that if I were to make such a statement, the player would clarify that I didn't misspeak and there is in fact some subtle effect forcing him to feel this way.

This misses that, in games where this method is used, your objections don't matter. This outcome is the truth, and the players and GM have to figure out how it can be the truth, not look for ways for it to not be the truth of the game. If you're looking for procedural truth generation -- where every prerequisite is met prior to establishing the fictional truth -- then this is going to be very confusing and hard to grasp. It is, instead, a product of a fluid set of events where you can determine the outcome and then go back to set up the prerequisite truths. The only constraint is that you can't overrule previously established truths (without good cause, at least) or genre expectations.

So, in this case, when the maiden softens your heart, then she is the right type, the right gender, and the right species because your heart is softened. Your job as a player now is to play with this new truth about yourself and find out where it goes. Perhaps this is a good thing. Perhaps it's a major problem (this maiden is the daughter of your hated rival, for instance), but, whatever it is, your heart is softened. Play on!

FrogReaver · Jul 4, 2019

Elfcrusher said:
@FrogReaver: is a first person shooter not a first person shooter when you aren’t actually firing a weapon?

If that's what you think I'm saying then you are totally misunderstanding me.

Nagol · Jul 4, 2019

Ovinomancer said:
This misses that, in games where this method is used, your objections don't matter. This outcome is the truth, and the players and GM have to figure out how it can be the truth, not look for ways for it to not be the truth of the game. If you're looking for procedural truth generation -- where every prerequisite is met prior to establishing the fictional truth -- then this is going to be very confusing and hard to grasp. It is, instead, a product of a fluid set of events where you can determine the outcome and then go back to set up the prerequisite truths. The only constraint is that you can't overrule previously established truths (without good cause, at least) or genre expectations.

So, in this case, when the maiden softens your heart, then she is the right type, the right gender, and the right species because your heart is softened. Your job as a player now is to play with this new truth about yourself and find out where it goes. Perhaps this is a good thing. Perhaps it's a major problem (this maiden is the daughter of your hated rival, for instance), but, whatever it is, your heart is softened. Play on!

Or the player interprets heart softening in a non-romantic way and leaves a bigger than normal tip.

But I'm not running those games right now and they aren't generally in my top tier of picks. Should I choose to run one in the future, I'll have to retrain/replace the players.

FrogReaver · Jul 4, 2019

Ovinomancer said:
Frankly, your argument is steeped in a single-point-of-view of how RPGs are played. It shows a lack of understanding of the broader context of RPGs and the varied playstyles. It relies on a one-true-way of playing, at least if you want to be able to claim you're still roleplaying. It fails to be a practically applicable definition -- it doesn't even work within the game you prefer without using special pleading for mechanics that subvert it (ie, "magic").

Since you keep bringing magic up let's take a moment and go more in depth on that topic. Let's take a dominate person like effect - that is a share fiction wherein the PC must obey the commands of an NPC.

It's very easy to roleplay a PC that is under seem mind altering affect that makes him obey the commands of another in fiction character. That is roleplaying! in fact, that may be the easiest roleplaying any one has ever done...

Contrast this with an out of fiction DM stating what your character must do. Having your PC do whatever the DM says isn't roleplay. Having your PC do what some other NPC says that has dominated him is roleplay.

Notice the difference?

Ratskinner · Jul 4, 2019

pemerton said:
This example shows how it is possible (i) for it to be true that the players choose what their PCs do - under a certain, fairly thin or confined sort of description - and (ii) for there to be fudge-free checks and yet (iii) for it also to be the case that the GM decides everything significant that happens - ie it is the GM who gets to establish the richer, wider, consequence-laden descriptions of what the PCs do.

I think that a failure to recognise this point makes a lot of discussions of railroading, "player agency" less productive or insightful than they might be.

What do others think about who does, or should, get to establish the truth of descriptions of PC actions, and how?

I think that all rpgs need to adopt some form of "goal setting" mechanic. (This can look like a lot of different things: clocks or countdowns are popular nowadays.) This needs to be out in the open. Because there are two rules about action narration that play off of these goals:
1) Not Yet - you cannot narrate an action that would effectively resolve a goal until (whatever pacing mechanics) are satisfied.
2) And Then - when you narrate an action that doesn't resolve a goal (either through failure or pacing mechanics), the GM (or possibly another player) may add to your narration describing the new state of the world.

There probably also needs to be an "objection" mechanic for narrative counter to established fiction.

Fenris-77 · Jul 4, 2019

I feel like a lot of the issues in this thread could be fixed by people just reading other good games, not even playing them, just reading. Mechanics are easy to port over, even from systems that don't share the d20. The issues 5E has with the second and third pillars are not insurmountable, and can mostly be fixed for a campaign in need with a quick patch and little maths.

pemerton · Jul 4, 2019

[MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION] - I pretty much agree with [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION]'s most recent post about what roleplaying is (post 139 on my count).

If I'm told to play an angry person, I can do that. If I'm told to play a person who is pulling the trigger to assassinate the duke, I can do that. If I'm told to play a person whose heart has just been melted by a wink, well I can do that to.

Being told "The magician has ensorcelled you - play that" is no different from being told "The maiden's wink has softened your heart - play that." In some ways the latter is actually easier, I think, because it's closer to a genuine human experience! (Unless you've spent a lot of time in the company of Svengali!)

I also want to go back to the Apocalypse World example that I posted and that Ovinomancer mentioned. The player establilshes that her PC is looking for an escape route. She makes her check and fails. So the GM narrates that she is looking at her barred window, thinking about how maybe she might be able to escape through it, as her enemies attack her with a grenade.

The GM isn't contradicting the player's account of her PC's action. The GM is adding further true descriptions of it, which obviously are adverse to the PC. (It's a failure, after all.)

There's nothing there that contraverts the idea that the player is playing his/her PC.

pemerton · Jul 4, 2019

Ratskinner said:
I think that all rpgs need to adopt some form of "goal setting" mechanic. (This can look like a lot of different things: clocks or countdowns are popular nowadays.) This needs to be out in the open. Because there are two rules about action narration that play off of these goals:
1) Not Yet - you cannot narrate an action that would effectively resolve a goal until (whatever pacing mechanics) are satisfied.
2) And Then - when you narrate an action that doesn't resolve a goal (either through failure or pacing mechanics), the GM (or possibly another player) may add to your narration describing the new state of the world.

The lack of this for onworld exploration in Classic Traveller is the biggest problem I've had with that system in my recent campaign.

Aldarc · Jul 4, 2019

FrogReaver said:
It's very easy to roleplay a PC that is under seem mind altering affect that makes him obey the commands of another in fiction character. That is roleplaying! in fact, that may be the easiest roleplaying any one has ever done...

I don't think that your first case is a good example of roleplaying. In most games, there is little roleplaying that transpires at these points, because the character often is effectively handing their character over to the DM as a result of the magic. It's essentially the TTRPG equivalent of "skip a turn" in a board or card game, usually IME resulting in player disengagement with their character. Because the player is usually thinking, "Cool. Just let me know when I have control over my character again and its my turn."

Fenris-77 · Jul 4, 2019

If the DM hands me a slip of paper that says: "As a result of your capture last night at the Wizard's manse you are now under mind control. Your personality will not change, but your primary goal is to lure the rest of the party to a meeting at the docks tonight at 11th bell. Your character will explain everything away with a tale of near capture and last minute escape and wlll not mention his capture or the mind control under any kind of duress."

So, mind control, ok. There are lots of campaigns where I would definitely still RP this, even D&D campaigns. But somehow because the DM was giving the instructions without the gossamer thin difference of NPC voice I'm somehow not roleplaying? I don't follow. The DM said it, I'm doing it, it's roleplaying. Maybe that doesn't satisfy your definition of "whatever the DM says"? IDK ...