Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[soviet]

Frankly, to me this comes across as poor immersion. You should care about what your character cares about and you should feel the pressure. Should act the conversation and the other players and the GM should too, and that creates real pressure. And yeah, it is not the same than the real situation just like a LARP fight with padded weapons is not the same than a real fight with real weapons, but it still gets your adrenaline going for real.

How many times IRL have you felt forced to agree to something that you didn't want to do? How many times in game?

How many times IRL have you worried and stressed about an upcoming conversation, or a conversation or meeting you just had? How many times in game?

And I am pretty sceptical about rules being add to the realness here. A rule telling me what my character should feel doesn't make me feel it if the fiction already doesn't. Like that is what I don't get about arguments like yours. If to you the situation portayed in the fiction does't feel real, how the hell will adding some rules help? Like if the words spoken by the NPC that the GM portrays doesn't convince you as you are immersed in the point of view of your chracter, how the rules saying that they rolled high on their check and now your chracter should believe their argument would make you feel any different?

You've hallucinated this. Please show me the post where I advocated for a complex rule set that dictates how your character should feel.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

How many times IRL have you felt forced to agree to something that you didn't want to do? How many times in game?

How many times IRL have you worried and stressed about an upcoming conversation, or a conversation or meeting you just had? How many times in game?

These things have happened both in real life and in game.

You've hallucinated this. Please show me the post where I advocated for a complex rule set that dictates how your character should feel.

What you want such a system to do and how will it make the situation more like the real life?

 

[Micah Sweet]

What? Do you not understand that I am the GM in this imagined situation?

If players don't have the desire to say anything beyond 'I attack' or 'I roll diplomacy' then I don't have the desire to play with them. Fortunately, no-one I've ever played with has been unable to add something more.

So you have no experience with the situation I described. That's fine, but it does mean you can't pass judgement on why such people act that way.

 

[Campbell]

So you have no experience with the situation I described. That's fine, but it does mean you can't pass judgement on why such people act that way.

I mean if a player isn't giving me enough information I'm going to ask for more clarification. Just "what does that look like?" and if that is too much the other demands of play are going to be way too much. But I have never really encountered someone who isn't capable of that much. I think asking players to have some level of imagination in a game played in an imagined space is more than fair.

 

[soviet]

What you want such a system to do and how will it make the situation more like the real life?

Well I designed and published it here: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/97631/other-worlds

Although it does not have the goal of making situations 'more like the real life' and I don't think that's even possible to achieve.

 

[soviet]

So you have no experience with the situation I described. That's fine, but it does mean you can't pass judgement on why such people act that way.

What do you mean? I'm not allowed to expect more? I'm not allowed to choose who I play with based on whether they make an effort?

The difference between 'I roll to attack' and 'I approach him cautiously, and test his defences with a quick strike' is well within the ability of any average person.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What do you mean? I'm not allowed to expect more? I'm not allowed to choose who I play with based on whether they make an effort?

The difference between 'I roll to attack' and 'I approach him cautiously, and test his defences with a quick strike' is well within the ability of any average person.

You're allowed to expect more from the people you choose to game with, but that doesn't mean it's fair to pass judgement on those that don't meet your standards, and especially on the hypothetical people who in your opinion taught them poorly.

 

[soviet]

You're allowed to expect more from the people you choose to game with, but that doesn't mean it's fair to pass judgement on those that don't meet your standards, and especially on the hypothetical people who in your opinion taught them poorly.

This is you looking for offence. I haven't said any of these things. When I said that 'I roll to attack' is a learned behaviour, I don't mean from some past abusive GM. I mean now, right now, in my game. So when they say 'I roll to do X' I say 'OK but what do you do?'. And thus they learn that 'I roll to do X' is not acceptable.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Although it does not have the goal of making situations 'more like the real life' and I don't think that's even possible to achieve.

But that was the whole argument for why the rules were needed! That a mere in-character conversation was not enough like the real life negotiations...

So you actually agree with me then, that rules are not needed for that purpose?

 

[soviet]

But that was the whole argument for why the rules were needed! That a mere in-character conversation was not enough like the real life negotiations...

So you actually agree with me then, that rules are not needed for that purpose?

I don't think that making it like real life is possible. I think you can make it engaging by playing it out, and so you should do it for that reason, but that if you want to have a resolution method that isn't simply GM fiat then you should use some mechanics as well.