Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay

[prabe]

Although I think there's something to be said, in RPGIng, for the PCs rather than NPCs being the centre of the action.

And how better in this case than as the guest of honor at an execution?

 

[Manbearcat]

And how better in this case than as the guest of honor at an execution?

Are there any action resolution mechanics involved?

Conflict resolution mechanics (Clocks in AW or Blades, Conflict in Mouse Guard or Strike!, Skill Challenges in 4e) would be perfect to let actual play decide the question “are the PCs executed or is there a gripping, narrow escape (that leads to x knock-on conflict and downstream effects)?”

That sounds pretty awesome.

If one participant at the table just decides that the walk up to the gallows and the hanging isn’t a site of conflict but rather just a fait accompli (or perhaps the entire time from the arrest to the execution) then I’m left wondering why we don’t just elide all kinds of other potential sites of conflict in the game and just have someone tell us what they think should/would happen?

 

[prabe]

Are there any action resolution mechanics involved?

Conflict resolution mechanics (Clocks in AW or Blades, Conflict in Mouse Guard or Strike!, Skill Challenges in 4e) would be perfect to let actual play decide the question “are the PCs executed or is there a gripping, narrow escape (that leads to x knock-on conflict and downstream effects)?”

That sounds pretty awesome.

If one participant at the table just decides that the walk up to the gallows and the hanging isn’t a site of conflict but rather just a fait accompli (or perhaps the entire time from the arrest to the execution) then I’m left wondering why we don’t just elide all kinds of other potential sites of conflict in the game and just have someone tell us what they think should/would happen?

In this instance it would be the result of player decisions, character actions and the game's resolution mechanics. Probably something I'd have handled offscreen while the players generated new characters. Clearly that is not the way @Retreater ended up deciding to handle it, but he's the one GMing those players, and he very likely knows them better than I do. He definitely has more patience for them than I would at this point.

 

[Fenris-77]

Either kill them or make a hard move. I'd probably take the hard move route and offer them freedom at a steep price. Someone who wants to discomfit the king but also has a use for a couple of desperate men for a task that is almost certain to result in their horrible deaths. The offer is to break them out, but at the cost of undertaking the task offered them, most likely with some uncomfortable sureties to ensure their compliance. Possible a slow acting poison that needs regular doses of antidote, with a final dose to be delivered upon completion (tip of the cap to Scott Lynch there).

 

[Lanefan]

But D&D has never been free kriegspiel in the strictest sense. Combat is resolved via dice rolls, which means that unexpected and "illogical" things can happen.

The effect of this is also that combat in D&D often has a degree of uncertainty associated with it.

A degree of uncertainty, sure, but there's still a fair amount of overall predictability as to the end outcome most of the time; with certainty increasing the farther apart the two sides are in powers and capabilities.

Is it important or necessary that other fields of endeavour by the characters have less uncertainty and/or more "logic"?

Social interaction - which, once the King's got them in the stocks, this pretty much is - follows the logic of roleplaying rather than dice; and depending on the characters (PC and NPC alike) and their personalities and-or motivaitons the outcomes can be just as unpredictable - or not.

Combat follows the logic of dice, if such a thing exists.

 

[MGibster]

But D&D has never been free kriegspiel in the strictest sense. Combat is resolved via dice rolls, which means that unexpected and "illogical" things can happen.

The unexpected happens from time-to-time, but I'd say the results of combat in D&D are typically logical in that they make sense within the context of the game.

 

[Imaculata]

And how better in this case than as the guest of honor at an execution?

In D&D I like to think a lot in 'scenes' (like in an exciting action movie), where my goal is to always move the plot forward towards new exciting scenes. This 'plot' is always steered by the players, whose actions lead from scene to scene. The players being brought before a large crowd for a public execution is just such a scene. If the players actually get executed, that would be the end of the movie. But I tend to set the scene in such a way that a harrowing escape is always possible. It is however up to the players to make that happen, and when they do, we continue from there.

Would Captain Jack Sparrow actually be executed in front of a crowd of onlookers, or do his allies enact a daring escape plan to save him just in the nick of time? Well in D&D, that's all up to the players of course. But I would frame the scene in such a way that they can and probably will, or introduce an npc that is willing to help them out for a price.

 

[Fenris-77]

The unexpected happens from time-to-time, but I'd say the results of combat in D&D are typically logical in that they make sense within the context of the game.

There's that, and also the fact that the D&D combat mechanics narrow the field of actions enough that the outcome becomes more predictable. You can escape the gravity of those rules, but I suspect a lot of games don't. Roll to hit, roll to damage, monster or PC dies, rinse and repeat. That doesn't mean it's always bland or anything, that's not the case, but the system does return a pretty small field of possible outcomes.

 

[Umbran]

Is it important or necessary that other fields of endeavour by the characters have less uncertainty and/or more "logic"?

The socratic method is time-honored, but is also passive-aggressive, pedantic, and kind of condescending, I'm afraid. If you were Socrates, and people were explicitly coming to you to be taught, you might get away with asking questions to which you already have an answer. Stepping into the middle of a conversation, acknowledging ignorance of much of the discussion, and then taking such a position? You are setting yourself up for argument, rather than success.

 

[pemerton]

In this instance it would be the result of player decisions, character actions and the game's resolution mechanics. Probably something I'd have handled offscreen while the players generated new characters

I don't understand how something can be handled offscreeen and yet also be the result of the game's resolution mechanics.

He definitely has more patience for them than I would at this point.

My view is that if the GM can't handle the players declaring actions for their PCs, s/he's taken on the wrong job.