Beginning to Doubt That RPG Play Can Be Substantively "Character-Driven"

*Deleted by user*

lowkey13 said:

But sometimes running across a true FATE devotee makes me wish I was stuck in an elevator with a Rush fan who needs to really, truly explain to me the genius of the late drummer Neil Peart with both words and by banging on the walls.

Click to expand...

All the walls, while sitting in a chair that spins.

I've noticed that about FATE, here. If I'm feeling at my most fair, I can admit that my reasons for disliking FATE are not entirely about the game, but sometimes life gets in the way of things.

lowkey13 said:

IME, people that like FATE really, really like FATE.

Click to expand...

To be clear. I like the system, but I know that it is for a particular style of game, and that's not a style I want all the time, much less expect everyone to want.

And people that don't can appreciate it, but don't care for it.

Click to expand...

Just a couple weeks ago, we were told, here on these boards that it was a system, "best enjoyed by ruthless power gamers." That sounds less like appreciation, and more like desire to cast aspersions on people. Ymmv.

*Deleted by user*

Umbran said:

Just a couple weeks ago, we were told, here on these boards that it was a system, "best enjoyed by ruthless power gamers." That sounds less like appreciation, and more like desire to cast aspersions on people. Ymmv.

Click to expand...

I remember that thread. I'm endeavoring not to bring all that into this thread.

I agree with @lowkey13 that "being for powergamers" isn't one of FATE's aspects.

lowkey13 said:

There was an issue re: the ongoing litigation and settlement between Arneson and Gygax. Basic D&D had a different royalty rate than AD&D (which had a core books royalty rate).

Click to expand...

While they had different royalty rates, I believe the reason was because Gygax convinced Arneson that 5% rate they were entitled to on D&D per their original 1975 agreement was excessive. Arneson appears to have agreed to a 2.5% rate as part of their March 6, 1981 settlement agreement.

Neonchameleon said:

In GURPS if I struggle with unfathomable anger I got points for taking that as a disadvantage. When it occurs it's because the dice told me it did - I'm not in control of my character while this happens (so I'm genuinely struggling) and it's the fault of the dice rather than something I've decided to do despite its impacts on group cohesion. So I'm not being anti-social out of character playing it. But it's not something I struggle with so much as am subject to.

Click to expand...

Note that for most GURPS disadvantages that affect your personality (like Bad Temper or Overconfidence), you are encouraged to roleplay the flaw unless circumstances are dire:

"You never have to try a self-control roll—you can always give in willingly, and it is good roleplaying to do so. However, there will be times when you really need to resist your urges, and that is what the roll is for." — GURPS 4e Basic Set: Characters, p. 121.

Interestingly in terms of the comparison with FATE, further down on the same page, GURPS provides an option where you can effectively spend XP to automatically avoid succumbing to your disadvantage: "Optionally, the GM may permit you to use one unspent character point to 'buy' an automatic success on a self-control roll." It's a common rule among groups that I've observed or gamed with.

prabe said:

I've also played games that had disadvantages in character creation. As I think about it, I realize those don't bother me much, probably because they're pretty concrete. You have [chance] for [bad thing] if [condition]. You've received build points in exchange for taking that disadvantage (or however the mechanic works). Presumably you've had a talk with the GM before starting the game about what that disadvantage means and how it works, and it won't really interrupt the flow of the game if/when it comes up.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. In most instances, players who succumb to their disadvantages (even voluntarily) aren't "showboating" or being "anti-social." Sure, I've seen a handful of dud players abuse the system and say "that's what my character would do," but that's true in any system. At most tables that I've played at (and I've played or observed GURPS games with hundreds of people over the years), character disadvantages become part of the texture of the group—a regular source of roleplaying banter. When the stakes are high enough that a player chooses to roll the dice, it's often one of the highlights of the session because it can send the fiction veering in new directions. For me, it's satisfying if the dice helped dictate that the barbarian lost his temper and yelled at the duke. If it was just a player making a dramatic choice, it's potentially more obnoxious.

uzirath said:

I agree with this. In most instances, players who succumb to their disadvantages (even voluntarily) aren't "showboating" or being "anti-social." Sure, I've seen a handful of dud players abuse the system and say "that's what my character would do," but that's true in any system. At most tables that I've played at (and I've played or observed GURPS games with hundreds of people over the years), character disadvantages become part of the texture of the group—a regular source of roleplaying banter. When the stakes are high enough that a player chooses to roll the dice, it's often one of the highlights of the session because it can send the fiction veering in new directions. For me, it's satisfying if the dice helped dictate that the barbarian lost his temper and yelled at the duke. If it was just a player making a dramatic choice, it's potentially more obnoxious.

Click to expand...

While I wasn't specifically thinking of GURPS (in fact, I haven't played it for the simple reason that none of my gaming groups played it), I concur about disadvantages overall, in systems that have them.

prabe said:

I've noticed that about FATE, here. If I'm feeling at my most fair, I can admit that my reasons for disliking FATE are not entirely about the game, but sometimes life gets in the way of things.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Life... sometimes isn't our friend. This may lead into something. Hang in there...

lowkey13 said:

IME, people that like FATE really, really like FATE.

And people that don't can appreciate it, but don't care for it.

Click to expand...

So, this is a bit about the internet that we supposedly know, but always seem to forget. It is a communication issue that I tend to think of as "Words mean things."

Now, @prabe seems to be pretty thoughtful and philosophical about it all. And you say folks, "appreciate but don't care for it."

But still, here I was having to react to the mechanics being described with worlds like "bribery" and "extortion" - things that are considered unethical and illegal. The connotations of those words are not "appreciative", unless you're a crook, which I don't think prabe is.

maybe folks will agree, there are two basic options:

1) Those were actually the feelings - in which case I submit that something not according to the rules, or otherwise pretty unfortunate or toxic was going on. Then yes, some not-good was happening in play, and unpacking what was going on may be a useful exercise. Prabe's comment about life kind of fits in here... no need to elaborate, as that could be pretty personal.

2) It was hyperbole for effect. I think getting on the case of fans for going over the top is misplaced when detractors get a pass for over-doing it themselves, hm?

Thus - words mean things. People will react to what you put on the page. If you don't want that... don't put it on the page, you know what I mean?

Well, this sure went a long way in the last 18-ish hours.

Without quoting a bunch of posts or going on at ridiculous length, I'll just sum up thusly:

To those who are speaking in favour of social mechanics being able to determine or force PC decisions/actions - that's all well and good, and no doubt such things enhance your games at your tables. All is good.

But if any of you ever start advocating for player agency (and some of you have in the past) I'll reserve the right to either take such advocation with a rather large grain of salt or outright call shenanigans; because the sort of mechanics you're favouring are completely antithetical to a player having agency over his/her character.