NPC Deception/Persuasion and player agency

[Bill Zebub]

No, but human nature includes a natural desire not to intentionally take actions with personal negative consequences.

Sure, and if I were able to make decisions in-game that would actually affect me in real life, I would probably always choose the most optimal.

Some bad decisions for my character mean entertainment for everybody at the table, including myself, and where the entertainment value outweighs the negative effect on my imaginary character. So, yeah, the net good for myself is positive, but for my character it's negative.

That's why we have rules that sometimes allow those negative consequences to happen outside player control. I see no reason why they can't apply to emotional danger as much as they apply to physical danger.

As in my previous post, I agree. There's no reason they can't do that. And some people may like that. I'm glad that games with such rules exist for those people.

But it's not necessary for rich roleplaying, and pointless to force it on somebody who doesn't want it.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Right, problem is folks get upset if you even suggest a social encounter outline. It's fine for combat, but social must remain freeform.

Right! And some people get really upset if you suggest that players should make decisions for their characters!

Strange, isn't it?

 

[Thomas Shey]

But it's not necessary for rich roleplaying, and pointless to force it on somebody who doesn't want it.

Depends on what you mean by "force". As noted, plenty of people will accept it that wouldn't do so by themselves.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Depends on what you mean by "force". As noted, plenty of people will accept it that wouldn't do so by themselves.

I don't know how many times I have to agree with this.

 

[payn]

Right! And some people get really upset if you suggest that players should make decisions for their characters!

Strange, isn't it?

Who has suggested they cannot?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't know how many times I have to agree with this.

As many times as you say things that seem to suggest the opposite.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right! And some people get really upset if you suggest that players should make decisions for their characters!

Strange, isn't it?

I don't think anyone here is "really upset".

 

[Campbell]

In literally every instance of play where the spotlight is on a given character in games like Apocalypse World, Monsterhearts, Vampire - The Requiem Second Edition, Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition, insert game with binding social mechanics players are making decisions about what their character believes, what their aims are and what course of action they will pursue. It's simply done under a set of established constraints based on established fiction and complications that occur through the course of play. You might not like those constraints or see the value in them, but it is disingenuous to say that players are not making decisions for their characters when that's what they are doing in almost every instance.

Another note: in every case I can think of games where there are some sort of binding social mechanics or mechanics that influence thoughts and feelings the impact of these things are not random. Random rolls to determine if something occurs are part of it, but we either talking about defined effects or complications that are determined by the judgement of the GM based on the fictional situation. You're losing a conflict or failing a check where something fictionally relevant impacts your character. No one is rolling on a random mood chart unless you are playing a 5e Eladrin.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't think anyone here is "really upset".

The worst I've seen is "vaguely annoyed".

 

[thefutilist]

In literally every instance of play where the spotlight is on a given character in games like Apocalypse World, Monsterhearts,

Yeah but I think I could sell Maxperson or Crimson on the Apocalypse World (maybe the Monsterhearts) mechanics because they're a really good example of applying gentle pressure in one area to charge the actual free-form roleplay (that max and crimson describe doing) that happens in another.

Most of the generalised examples of rolling for control I've read here are pretty terrible.