I want my actions to matter

[John Dallman]

For some folks I've played with, it's meant "I want to do whatever I want," basically asking for sandbox-style play, while for others it's been "I want to reap the consequences of my actions," where they want the game's narrative to follow logically from preceding events. And some folks have wanted both.

Whereas to me, it mostly means "I want to have some effect on the setting." That pretty much requires the narrative to respond to events, and the characters to have some kind of objective., rather than just doing what they like.

 

[mamba]

I'm on board to "turn anything into an adventure". But many players are not.

they should be, not sure what more they can expect, they cannot simply press the 'I win' button

The adventure starts, and the players accept to quest. Then, suddenly at random they decide to rob the gambling house where the adventure started. I don't care, so they "try". They quickly find out the vault is guarded and protected by all sorts of tricks, traps and security. A lot like a typical real world vault. And the vault has no huge easy way in...like an unlocked back door (Yuk Yuk). And the players can't even just 'roll stealth' past the guard dogs.

well, tough, then either your attempt at robbing the vault failed because you suck at this or did not properly plan it through. Just saying I want does not make it so, find a way to overcome the dogs (attack them, poisoned meat, some spells, ...) and the other obstacles, do not just expect two 'I roll stealth' and one 'I pick the lock' for this.

So the players with their default "stumble around" style find it "impossible" to rob the vault. And this is where the "I want my actions to matter whine starts".

I think what your players want and what you want are fundamentally not aligned, you should hash this out first and if either side cannot compromise enough for both to be happy with the end result, call it quits, this seems to not be working for anyone

 

[Reynard]

Saying "Yes and" or "Yes but" doesn't mean that the PCs are free from consequences, it means they get to enjoy the consequences of their dubious choices.

 

[pointofyou]

Again, this sounds great as a vague statement....but what about game play?

If the players want to rob a bank the game becomes about how they decide to do that and whether that approach works. If the players want to play a game of politics and intrigue the game becomes about that. If the players want explore new worlds and encounter new civilizations the game becomes about that. Ideally of course the participants have agreed to play a game with rules that work well with or support or at least enable the play at the table to be what the people at the table want it to be about.

I know this makes the game more about the players and less about you than you seem to prefer.That's probably why you persistently refuse to understand what's really a very simple concept.

 

[BookTenTiger]

This does not seem to be what players are compiling about though. And this is still being too lost in the vagueness.


Again, this sounds great as a vague statement....but what about game play?

Yea, the players want to rob a bank and the DM throws politics at them is an easy 'bad'.


I typically have the problem that the player/person will refuse to speak with me. And the few that do get stuck on the vague concepts that don't really make for a conversation.


This is a bit of a false thing players think out of context. Sure in an RPG you can do anything, in a vague sense. But when you get down to the game play level of an active game the player can't just alter reality on a whim and 'win' the game. That would not even be a game.


Yea, this is the Video Game Problem. The player walks up to the vault and wants to "roll stealth" and get past the guards. So when I explain that the hallway is bare with nothing but the door and the guards, the player gets upset they can't just "roll stealth".



This sounds great in the vague way. However, when the player has their character wander into the nearby town they get all upset they can't just "hire a massive construction crew" to rebuild the castle. And they get upset the town does not have 20,000 stone blocks at Wal Mart (haha) that they can "just buy" and put on their single wagon.


I say that a lot.

I don't see much difference.


I'm on board to "turn anything into an adventure". But many players are not.

The adventure starts, and the players accept to quest. Then, suddenly at random they decide to rob the gambling house where the adventure started. I don't care, so they "try". They quickly find out the vault is guarded and protected by all sorts of tricks, traps and security. A lot like a typical real world vault. And the vault has no huge easy way in...like an unlocked back door (Yuk Yuk). And the players can't even just 'roll stealth' past the guard dogs.

So the players with their default "stumble around" style find it "impossible" to rob the vault. And this is where the "I want my actions to matter whine starts".

Your problem seems to be more about players getting upset and whining than anything gameplay related.

 

[Krachek]

The adventure starts, and the players accept to quest. Then, suddenly at random they decide to rob the gambling house where the adventure started. I don't care, so they "try". They quickly find out the vault is guarded and protected by all sorts of tricks, traps and security. A lot like a typical real world vault. And the vault has no huge easy way in...like an unlocked back door (Yuk Yuk). And the players can't even just 'roll stealth' past the guard dogs.

The gambling house, how do you describe it at first?
Why do I feel that it is more protected than the bank?
Hacking a small gambling house can be an easy shot, for a small reward.
It’s not mandatory to challenge PCs at their top.

 

[bloodtide]

I know this makes the game more about the players and less about you than you seem to prefer.That's probably why you persistently refuse to understand what's really a very simple concept.

Not really. I'm fine with the high concept. Good players can say what they want in a game before the game starts. Bad players pretend to want something, then after they start that for an hour or so do a "sandbox surprise" and want to do something else.

Really any game will be what I prefer, under the cloak of"whatever the players want". If the players want politics, I'll give them West Wing, House of Cards, Succession, Rome and Spin City cranked up to 11. Though this won't fit well with their idea of "loony tune politics", but that's on them.

The gambling house, how do you describe it at first?
Why do I feel that it is more protected than the bank?
Hacking a small gambling house can be an easy shot, for a small reward.
It’s not mandatory to challenge PCs at their top.

The typical problem player does not listen. I can describe endlessly, and they won't care.

The players just "imagine" in their own minds everything is weak and easy....but they still get huge rewards and loot.


I was hoping for more basic in game examples, not all the vague high and fluff stuff.

L

 

[pointofyou]

Not really. I'm fine with the high concept. Good players can say what they want in a game before the game starts. Bad players pretend to want something, then after they start that for an hour or so do a "sandbox surprise" and want to do something else.

Except you don't understand how a game can possibly work where what the players do matters.

Really any game will be what I prefer, under the cloak of"whatever the players want". If the players want politics, I'll give them West Wing, House of Cards, Succession, Rome and Spin City cranked up to 11. Though this won't fit well with their idea of "loony tune politics", but that's on them.

If the only person at the table whose actions matter is you then everything that happens at the table is on you.

 

[Smackpixi]

A good GM allows players to make decisions that matter. You don’t put a vault full of gold in a game if trying rob it is something you won’t allow. Good players won’t try to expand their agency beyond what they know their GM is ready to deal with, has prepared.

A GM creates a space in which players can, as the expression goes, do whatever they want (within the rules). Your space shouldn’t be precious, let them burn that bridge, figure out what happens. But so many times these conversations go like, ”I prepped this awesome dungeon and the players stole a boat and are going to try their hand at being pirates”. Uh no, that’s not being a good player, it‘s a cooperative game, everyone needs too cooperate with EVERYONE at the table. If the players don’t want to dungeon crawl, want to be pirates, that’s an outside of the game conversation.

Respect the people you’re playing with and the work they’ve done and have fun. Not being able to chose to play a different game doesn’t constrain player agency. Collapsing the entrance to the dungeon doesn’t ruin all your work. Adapt.

 

[hawkeyefan]

@bloodtide Do you ever play at all? Or do you only GM?