Players choose what their PCs do . . .

Elfcrusher said:

I do get that risk and uncertainty make (or can make) games more exciting. But the consequence of a risk gone awry does matter. Traditionally (at least in my experience) in an RPG some of the things exposed to risk are:
- Health/Life
- Treasure/Possessions
- Allies
- Reputation
- XP/Levels (in older versions of D&D, for example)
- Maybe some other stuff I'm not thinking off at the moment.

Sure, "Character Concept" could be added to this list. But I'm not sure what that achieves, except to annoy people who think they should be in control of the concept.

Click to expand...

It means that the RPG can have story arcs comparable to other dramatic mediums. In film, think eg Casblanca. In literature, think eg The Human Factor.

In genre fiction, think eg Han Solo (who, in Star Wars, turns out not to be the mercenary he thought he was) or Nameless, Jet Li's character in Hero (who in the end choose not to take the vengeance that he had pursued). Of course many other examples could also be given.

FrogReaver said:

I really don't understand why @Ovinomancer and others can't grasp this simple concept.

Challenges are about risk. Risk is based on uncertainity. However, even in a perfectly deterministic world, there is still uncertainty which means there is still risk which means there's still challenges. Thus, you don't need a randomization method like dice to produce uncertainty.

Chess actually makes a great example. Chess is a deterministic game and it's very challenging. It's challenging because there's always uncertainty because as a human we don't possess the knowledge of all game states. That lack of knowledge causes uncertainty which causes risk which causes challenge.

Now consider a simple game of a coin flip where you win if a heads is flipped. There's uncertainty there. You have a great chance to lose the game and no control over winning or losing (without cheating). That kind of a game doesn't present a challenge even though there could potentially be risk and uncertainty. The real challenge with such a game is the betting aspect. Do you continue to bet to try to win one more time or do you walk away. That's where the challenge in such a game really lies.

In RPG terms. I struggle to see a challenge simply resulting from the DM saying random maiden approaches you, make a save. That's not a challenge, even though there's risk and uncertainty IMO, as there's no decision point for the character or the player.

Click to expand...

I do, too. Weird, huh, that I'd agree with this last bit so easily, like maybe you've missed something fundamental?

Ovinomancer said:

I do, too. Weird, huh, that I'd agree with this last bit so easily, like maybe you've missed something fundamental?

Click to expand...

Maybe you took my meds this time

FrogReaver said:

Maybe you took my meds this time

Click to expand...

Dude, irony. Those comments were made about taking things either out-of-context or imagined and then trying to pin those arguments on other posters. Like you just did to me. You cannot find anywhere in this thread (or others) where I've gotten even close to saying that telling a player to make a saving throw out of the blue is a challenge. You've erected a strawman. Have fun with it.

Maxperson said:

The character is really just a sheet of paper. It's the player inhabiting the idea of the character that gives it life. That's why I don't understand this idea that you can challenge the character socially, without challenging the player.

Click to expand...

That's because you are again swapping between different kinds of "challenge" willy-nilly.

We typically talk about "challenge the player" and "challenge the character" in a rather game-centered* manner. If I had you a sudoku puzzle to solve, with no reference to the mechanics your character uses, I am challenging you, the player. If I give a strictly constructed skill challenge (make skill check one, make skill check 2...), I can challenge the character build, with the player agency front-loaded back in character generation and advancement, and little found at game runtime. In a complex combat, with many tactical options, I can challenge the combination.

But, this branch started as we were talking about *challenging the core concepts* of the character. And, honestly, this is nothing like the other challenges we were talking about - this is about psychology and narrative, not about skills and tactical game play like the other challenges are. You can't elide from one to the other and expect the conversation to make much sense. So, yes, if you keep doing this, you will not understand.

You are the only one who can stop you from doing this. When you stop the bait-and-switching, maybe we can have a cogent discussion.




*We might even say "gamist", but that's going to open another can of worms.

Aebir-Toril said:

Yes, it's not a real challenge. Exactly.

Maybe [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] means that it's mechanical challenge, which it is (your character's probability of succeeding is tested, but that makes it less of a challenge and more of a "save or get charmed", which is honestly more of an attack than something that challenges the player.

Click to expand...

Actually, I think save or be charmed isn't much of a challenge, either. My argument has been that making a choice isn't a challenge if you can chose between all the choices. Even the unknown repercussions don't make it a challenge, just a guessing game. A challenge requires that something be staked and that you have a risk of losing your stakes. There's lots and lots of ways to do this, even without dice. In an RPG, though, it pretty much requires some kind of mechanic to determine the uncertainty, even if that mechanic is "DM chooses." I think that's a lousy mechanic, but there you go.

Ovinomancer said:

Dude, irony. Those comments were made about taking things either out-of-context or imagined and then trying to pin those arguments on other posters. Like you just did to me. You cannot find anywhere in this thread (or others) where I've gotten even close to saying that telling a player to make a saving throw out of the blue is a challenge. You've erected a strawman. Have fun with it.

Click to expand...

Okay Mr Grumpy - can't take a joke - but can belittle others

I agree with [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] and [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] that making a choice - even a hard choice - isn't a challenge to character and character concept of the sort that has been raised in this thread.

Whether you need mechanics (social mechanics, emotional mechanics, whatever they might be) to generate that sort of challenge is a further question. My view is that you don't, although obviously they might help. To expain why I think you don't need such mechanics, I want to quote a recent post:

Campbell said:

If I am playing or running a game that is supposed to be more character focused I absolutely do make aesthetic judgments of other players and I expect the same in kind. We should all be invested in each others' characters - be fans of them. For that to happen players should play their characters as if they were real people with real passions and real relationships. Players should play their characters with integrity and want to find out who they really are. They shouldn't try to drive play to some preferred outcome. Still ultimately their decisions to make, but they have responsibilities to what we are creating together.

Click to expand...

The key idea I take away from this is one of fidelity - to the fiction, and to what is revealed about the character in the fiction.

In order to get the sort of fiction that will generate such demands of fidelity, I think we need (at least) mutiple scenes that put the character under pressure - these are choices in which the player knows what is at stake and in which the GM is prepared to hold the character (and thereby the player) to account.

This relates to the notion of uncertainty. I don't think uncertainty is important at the moment of choice, especially if it means uncertainty as to what the GM will decide in the future. For a choice to be hard in the sense at issue, there needs to be certainty: certainty as to the hard outcome for the character (and thereby the player).

But a single choice, even a hard one, won't generate a fiction that generates a demand for fidelity. We need multiple scenes, an unfolding trajectory, the generation of pressure, perhaps mulitple sources of pressure. And as a result there will be uncertainty about how a collectively-established ficiton will arise over time.

This also brings it back to mechanics. Mechanics are one useful way for helping determine outcomes of situations. And they can modulate pressure. HeroQuest revised is probably the clearest expression of this in RPG design, but it can also be scene in (say) MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic and Burning Wheel.

Ovinomancer said:

Actually, I think save or be charmed isn't much of a challenge, either. My argument has been that making a choice isn't a challenge if you can chose between all the choices. Even the unknown repercussions don't make it a challenge, just a guessing game. A challenge requires that something be staked and that you have a risk of losing your stakes. There's lots and lots of ways to do this, even without dice. In an RPG, though, it pretty much requires some kind of mechanic to determine the uncertainty, even if that mechanic is "DM chooses." I think that's a lousy mechanic, but there you go.

Click to expand...

In real life - What about chess? Is Chess a challenge? (assuming two nearly equally skilled players)

pemerton said:

I agree with @Ovinomancer and @Umbran that making a choice - even a hard choice - isn't a challenge to character and character concept of the sort that has been raised in this thread.

Whether you need mechanics (social mechanics, emotional mechanics, whatever they might be) to generate that sort of challenge is a further question. My view is that you don't, although obviously they might help.

Click to expand...

Those 2 sentences appear to contradict each other. Let me elaborate:

At first you say a hard choice isn't a challenge. Then you say you believe a challenge can be made without mechanics. What other method could possibly result in a challenge besides either mechanics or a hard choice?