GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[Lanefan]

That's not a "who" and pushes the point that there really aren't PCs in the base story.

There's very much PCs in the base story - lots of 'em, in fact - but what you might not be willing to admit is that in this case the story is bigger than any of the characters in it.

Much like a good big sprawling campaign.

 

[Jd Smith1]

What are you going on about? Cersi was basically one of the kardashians thrown in charge of kings landing who went around having sex & backstabbing people over petty slights till it finally collapsed around her with every bridge burned. She was the quivilant of the pc that constantly sabotages a campaign & says "I'm only playing my alignment"

She has numerous parallels among historical rulers.

Again, GoT isn't a fantasy setting per se. Trying to think of it in the simplistic D&D outlook doesn't work. GoT covers real issues that fantasy, especially D&D ignores, such as normal human motivations, poverty, disease, and the effects of war on a nation as a whole.

 

[tetrasodium]

She has numerous parallels among historical rulers.

Again, GoT isn't a fantasy setting per se. Trying to think of it in the simplistic D&D outlook doesn't work. GoT covers real issues that fantasy, especially D&D ignores, such as normal human motivations, poverty, disease, and the effects of war on a nation as a whole.

That I don't doubt, I wouldn't be surprised if that chapter of her live was based on a specific one of them a well. That doesn't make her a good example for a PC any sane gm would tolerate

 

[Jd Smith1]

That I don't doubt, I wouldn't be surprised if that chapter of her live was based on a specific one of them a well. That doesn't make her a good example for a PC any sane gm would tolerate

Well, she's a character in a novel, not a PC, so the comparison is pointless.

As to an example, it depends upon the campaign. Running a PC with low wisdom (she was not stupid), selfish, and self-centered would be a lot more interesting than the standard, cookie-cutter 'hero'.

But some people don't want depth and substance in their campaign, and that's their choice.

 

[billd91]

If Cersei was a PC, her class was "dating the gm", her pettiness fueled incompetence rose to astounding levels & if not for varys/littlefinger/tyrion/queen of roses kings landing would have torn itself apart long before it finally fell. There is no way a group playing anything but maybe fiasco would tolerate such a PC

So... a GM not allowing a player to play an elf is some unforgivable violation of player agency, but not tolerating them playing a conniving tyrant somehow isn’t? How does that square?

 

[tetrasodium]

So... a GM not allowing a player to play an elf is some unforgivable violation of player agency, but not tolerating them playing a conniving tyrant somehow isn’t? How does that square?

different problems entirely. If a player said "I want to play a conniving tyrant" the gm's impulse would likely be to decide if that fit the campaign, in game of thrones the gm could point at a role like the queen of thorns & offer a plot/subplot that was as constructive to the campaign as she was. Cerci's flaw was that she went full kender & backstabbed her allies/fellow PCs. If a player wants to play an elf & the gm does not even try to point that player towards things in the world that preserve some fraction of what the player's looking for before deciding it won't work out & instead just says no elves the fault is on the GM for the initial poor handling.

 

[tetrasodium]

Seriously? Its called playing a role. Where is it written that PCs MUST be heroic, competent, or even sane? What an inflexible view of the hobby; I mean, there's no wrong way to play, but IMO a party of colorless PCs would be pretty pointless to GM. It would rank up with a group made of random strangers who meet in a tavern and are hired by a mysterious stranger to get a powerful widget from a nearby, illogically-placed ruin.

I much prefer a group of PCs with individual backstories, personalities, foibles, and natures as compared to cookie-cutter stereotypes.

absolutely not. That's the reason why kender are so toxic. If cerci is assumed to be a pc as someone else suggested earlier she is deep into that style of toxicity. Cerci's player made a conscious choice to play a toxic petty backstabbing bridge burning incompetent kardashian wannabe. any excuse that bears resemblance to "I'm only playing my character" is generally just the reverse order of "no offense but.." In one, the speaker is about to say something unacceptable, in the other the speaker probably just did something unacceptable but could be saying it pre-emptively. "I'm a roleplayer" & "I'm only playing my character" are not blanket immunity for the choices that player made for their character to get there or the failure to not invent any excuse to not be toxic

 

[Jd Smith1]

absolutely not. That's the reason why kender are so toxic. If cerci is assumed to be a pc as someone else suggested earlier she is deep into that style of toxicity. Cerci's player made a conscious choice to play a toxic petty backstabbing bridge burning incompetent kardashian wannabe. any excuse that bears resemblance to "I'm only playing my character" is generally just the reverse order of "no offense but.." In one, the speaker is about to say something unacceptable, in the other the speaker probably just did something unacceptable but could be saying it pre-emptively. "I'm a roleplayer" & "I'm only playing my character" are not blanket immunity for the choices that player made for their character to get there or the failure to not invent any excuse to not be toxic

You completely missed the entire thrust of Cerci. She consistently thinks she is as clever as her father, as dangerous as her twin, and as witty as her younger brother.

I admit, a lot of GMs can't handle a group of PCs who don't play to the '60s sitcom standard of behavior that D&D suggests. But like a good novel, a gaming group should include PCs who are real, not just silly cardboard cut-outs.

 

[tetrasodium]

You completely missed the entire thrust of Cerci. She consistently thinks she is as clever as her father, as dangerous as her twin, and as witty as her younger brother.

I admit, a lot of GMs can't handle a group of PCs who don't play to the '60s sitcom standard of behavior that D&D suggests. But like a good novel, a gaming group should include PCs who are real, not just silly cardboard cut-outs.

I read the books so was very aware of that and the fact that she thinks she's as "clever" as tywin doesn't change matters. cersi thinking she was the manipulative villain of manipulative villaians, but in reality she was playing at saturday morning cartoon level in a game of grandmaster villaians more than happy to play the long game.

If cerci were a player no group would tolerate her for long without the gm pulling rank with "we are dating/engaged/married" & barring that particular shield of plot armor any gm equal or better than mildly incompetent would quickly boot her player or strike her dead with lightning/falling rocks long before the fall of kings landing. She actively backstabbed & pushed away people like jamie & tyrion who were keeping everything together If the other "PCs" are littlefinger & the queen of thorns though my point is proven given the completion of their plotting. A player who chooses to backstab the party & engage in constant campaign sabotage as Cersi lannister did. Your attempt to pin it on a gm needing to up their game ignores the fact that this one toxic player is only one player in a group of more than one. Part of being even a "sorta kinda almost ok" level gm is to make sure that a toxic player does not go around ruining the experience for the other players at his or her table.

edit: even with the tv series trying to suggest that she was sometimes mildly competent her incompetence was blinding & I found that within seconds of looking

 

[Jd Smith1]

I read the books so was very aware of that and the fact that she thinks she's as "clever" as tywin doesn't change matters. cersi thinking she was the manipulative villain of manipulative villaians, but in reality she was playing at saturday morning cartoon level in a game of grandmaster villaians more than happy to play the long game.

If cerci were a player no group would tolerate her for long without the gm pulling rank with "we are dating/engaged/married" & barring that particular shield of plot armor any gm equal or better than mildly incompetent would quickly boot her player or strike her dead with lightning/falling rocks long before the fall of kings landing. She actively backstabbed & pushed away people like jamie & tyrion who were keeping everything together If the other "PCs" are littlefinger & the queen of thorns though my point is proven given the completion of their plotting. A player who chooses to backstab the party & engage in constant campaign sabotage as Cersi lannister did. Your attempt to pin it on a gm needing to up their game ignores the fact that this one toxic player is only one player in a group of more than one. Part of being even a "sorta kinda almost ok" level gm is to make sure that a toxic player does not go around ruining the experience for the other players at his or her table.

edit: even with the tv series trying to suggest that she was sometimes mildly competent her incompetence was blinding & I found that within seconds of looking

You have a very narrow way of looking at this. Cerci remains one of my favorite characters in the series. Imperfect people make for excellent novels.

But to each their own. Just understand that the declarations you are making about GM'ing simply represent your standards, not the hobby as a whole.