Cheating, Action Points, and Second Wind

[apoptosis]

That said, if your group wasn't looking to deal with the consequences of failure, I'm not sure why failure was on the table in the first place. What was the point of playing out the hostage situation if no one wanted any chance of losing?

That was a great analysis to the issue. Why have the stake in a resolution that would destroy the game.

Either the resolution result is an illusion (the DM basically has it so they really cant fail in which case why roll dice at all) or the result is disastrous.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well, first, I think this is more an indictment of the RPG in question than fudging/not-fudging. Your group had certain expectations that were not shared by the rule system (possibly due to a bait-and-switch on the part of the RPG, which is pretty common).

That said, if your group wasn't looking to deal with the consequences of failure, I'm not sure why failure was on the table in the first place. What was the point of playing out the hostage situation if no one wanted any chance of losing?

And even if it was a campaign-ending moment where a major character got killed... isn't that pretty dramatic? What's wrong with a story that doesn't end happily? It obviously had a big impact on the group, and isn't that worth something?

I don´t know this situation, and I also think that the situation seemed badly prepared... by DM and by the players... (if they had lost initiative they would have even less chances)

why not using magic/diplomatics etc to calm him down, or surprise etc... but it wasn´t what the players and the DM were expecting and so he should have used rule zero.

If other players feel only victory when some of their PCs were killed, then of course the DM should not fudge... so he uses rule zero to use the rules as written: it is your game, its up to you that players have fun.

And there is never a system which has all rules always fitting for your group, so you have to use the best available... and buzz, i am still on your side...

as to unhappy endings: my players sometimes do such strange (from DM point of view) things that it doesn´t need particularly bad luck for a TPK, but without bad luck on top of dubious actions on the PCs behalf, PC deaths should be rather rare...
... I know some groups (mostly with DMs used to shadowrun) which need new chars every session.

 

[LostSoul]

That said, if your group wasn't looking to deal with the consequences of failure, I'm not sure why failure was on the table in the first place. What was the point of playing out the hostage situation if no one wanted any chance of losing?

I agree with buzz, but...

If your goal for play is to feel as though your characters were in a Star Wars story or something like that, what do you do? The Millenium Falcon is not going to be blown up by TIE fighters as it leaves the Death Star. So what do we do in that fight? Does the DM handwave it? Is it played out freeform, without dice or any consequences?

I don't think you could get away without rolling. The PCs are being shot at, they are in a fight, you need to roll the dice!

I think mook rules - PCs can't be killed, yet they are still "in combat" - would work. Or powerful Action Points.

But in the absence of these things, you'll need Rule 0.

 

[buzz]

Never the less, it's in the rules, so claiming it's "cheating" is simply false.

I said it above, but Rule 0/"Golden Rule", IIRC, doesn't actually appear in the 3.5 rules. DMG p.18 does sort of point in that direction, though.

 

[buzz]

But in the absence of these things, you'll need Rule 0.

The ideal situation would, in your SW example, be a SW RPG where the Falcon getting destroyed simply isn't an option, as that jibes with the SW "genre."

Unfortunately, a lot of publishers, designers, and even fans assume that, since it's an RPG, it needs to have rules for combat where PCs can die, or tactical movement, or armor piercing attacks, or economics, etc. Simultaneously, you get this basic assumption that ignoring the rules is part-and-parcel of using them, because of course they are never going to produce the results you want with any consistency. I.e., you're playing a game that purports to be Star Wars but still allows PCs to die from random die rolls, which of course makes no sense.

This is precisely why I'm so into wacky indie games and mechanics akin to Action Points in more popular games, as they aim to challenge this very notion. I.e., how about we ditch/subvert the standard design method and make a game that does what it advertises without fudging.

 

[apoptosis]

The ideal situation would, in your SW example, be a SW RPG where the Falcon getting destroyed simply isn't an option, as that jibes with the SW "genre."

Unfortunately, a lot of publishers, designers, and even fans assume that, since it's an RPG, it needs to have rules for combat where PCs can die, or tactical movement, or armor piercing attacks, or economics, etc. Simultaneously, you get this basic assumption that ignoring the rules is part-and-parcel of using them, because of course they are never going to produce the results you want with any consistency. I.e., you're playing a game that purports to be Star Wars but still allows PCs to die from random die rolls, which of course makes no sense.

This is precisely why I'm so into wacky indie games and mechanics akin to Action Points in more popular games, as they aim to challenge this very notion. I.e., how about we ditch/subvert the standard design method and make a game that does what it advertises without fudging.

Another great post and i agree fully.

If you don't want PC death to be an option, then the game rules should be such that it is not an option.

If it is important for PC death to be an option (to say create a form of tension) then 'cheating' when it happens to ameliorate this result makes it all become an illusion.

I tend to really like indie games as they do a nice job of having the mechanics match the mode and style of play.

What I tend to see a lot is the 'illusion of the threat of death' which really doesn't fool anyone involved.

You see a lot of DMs say "PCs should not die insignificant or meaningless death..against mooks for instance"

In this case either never set up battles between PCs and mooks (if it is a meaningless death then it is a meaningless victory generally speaking) or have rules that state "PCs cannot die because of mooks" or have some form of mechanic (eg action points, PC scene control) that allow a player to completely negate a meaningless death.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Never the less, it's in the rules, so claiming it's "cheating" is simply false.

It really does depend on how you define cheating. Players may feel cheated if a DM changes the game in a certain way.

As I see it, the action point mechanic is one way to help players have the control over the game that the DM would normally have to change the otherwise random outcomes of the game. This helps player feel less cheated, either by the dice, the rules, the circumstance or themselves.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Unfortunately, a lot of publishers, designers, and even fans assume that, since it's an RPG, it needs to have rules for combat where PCs can die, or tactical movement, or armor piercing attacks, or economics, etc. Simultaneously, you get this basic assumption that ignoring the rules is part-and-parcel of using them, because of course they are never going to produce the results you want with any consistency. I.e., you're playing a game that purports to be Star Wars but still allows PCs to die from random die rolls, which of course makes no sense.

This is precisely why I'm so into wacky indie games and mechanics akin to Action Points in more popular games, as they aim to challenge this very notion. I.e., how about we ditch/subvert the standard design method and make a game that does what it advertises without fudging.

Excellently well put.

It also reminds me of the Harlequin adventure for Shadowrun. I believe the authors don't give a rules description of Harlequin for the explicit purpose of preventing the PCs from fighting and killing him.

 

[Rel]

If your goal for play is to feel as though your characters were in a Star Wars story or something like that, what do you do? The Millenium Falcon is not going to be blown up by TIE fighters as it leaves the Death Star. So what do we do in that fight? Does the DM handwave it? Is it played out freeform, without dice or any consequences?

The way I tend to run games the Millenium Falcon COULD be blown up by TIE fighters. It's just exceedingly unlikely that it will. There are tons of ways to mitigate that sort of thing if you're a creative GM with a decent group of players.

If the ship is faster then chances are it'll only be subject to a few attacks before the PC's have the option to flee (and this is totally within the genre - almost the only thing the Millenium Falcon DOES is flee!). If it has better armor and shields then the PC's should have a good chance to know if they are in trouble. If the PC's ship blows up a bunch of TIE fighters then it's plausible that the remaining ones will be called back to the Death Star. Maybe the bad guys did that because they've planted a homing device on the Millenium Falcon. If things go really bad then maybe the PC's get tractor beamed back on board the Death Star. Maybe the ship has escape pods they can use.

There are just tons and tons of ways to get out of this kind of trap. And if they don't...well our group would probably have a big laugh about it and start rolling up new characters.

That said, one type of game mechanic that I have come to really like is some kind of action point that can be spent to make a "dramatic edit". Basically the players can rewrite the reality of the game world by spending these points, provided that they spend enough of them and get the GM's approval. If you've got a group of players that are creative then this can be the ultimate "get out of jail free card" that is a ton of fun to use.

The way I implemented this in my last campaign (Warhammer FRP/Pirates of the Carribean) was that they could spend Fortune Points to do dramatic edits. A player could spend a single point and say something like, "While we're fighting on the deck of the ship, the enemy pirate steps in a bucket and is at a penalty to all attack rolls until he gets it off his foot!" They could spend three points and say something like, "The wind shifts and the mizzen boom sweeps across the quarterdeck! Everybody up there has to make an Agility Test or be swept overboard!" And the group of players could collectively spend like ten of them to say, "Just as the enemy ship is about to bring their full broadside to bear on us, they hit an uncharted reef! They are stuck until they can make a bunch of Sailing Tests to get the ship off the reef (thus giving us time to escape!)."

I found that to be a lot more gratifying than just being able to add 1d6 onto a d20 roll. And it gives the players more flexibility in how they can save themselves if the you-know-what hits the fan.

 

[apoptosis]

That said, one type of game mechanic that I have come to really like is some kind of action point that can be spent to make a "dramatic edit". Basically the players can rewrite the reality of the game world by spending these points, provided that they spend enough of them and get the GM's approval. If you've got a group of players that are creative then this can be the ultimate "get out of jail free card" that is a ton of fun to use.

The way I implemented this in my last campaign (Warhammer FRP/Pirates of the Carribean) was that they could spend Fortune Points to do dramatic edits. A player could spend a single point and say something like, "While we're fighting on the deck of the ship, the enemy pirate steps in a bucket and is at a penalty to all attack rolls until he gets it off his foot!" They could spend three points and say something like, "The wind shifts and the mizzen boom sweeps across the quarterdeck! Everybody up there has to make an Agility Test or be swept overboard!" And the group of players could collectively spend like ten of them to say, "Just as the enemy ship is about to bring their full broadside to bear on us, they hit an uncharted reef! They are stuck until they can make a bunch of Sailing Tests to get the ship off the reef (thus giving us time to escape!)."

I found that to be a lot more gratifying than just being able to add 1d6 onto a d20 roll. And it gives the players more flexibility in how they can save themselves if the you-know-what hits the fan.

I think drama points that allow control of the narrative like what you described are a great idea.

Actually I had thought that they might also be a possible way to balance characters as well (weaker characters get more drama points or while more powerful characters get fewer).