Player Control, OR "How the game has changed over the years, and why I don't like it"

[The Shaman]

A wise man once said the following on these very message boards, and it has always stuck with me . . .

I believe what Wik finds troublesome is not that the players are writing half the story, but that they're overwriting his half as well.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I am having a hard time parsing Wik's complaint into a form that makes sense to me.

I can't understand the idea that "My player uses X power, and Y happens" is somehow objectionable.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I believe what Wik finds troublesome is not that the players are writing half the story, but that they're overwriting his half as well.

Well, not half, but a particular niche piece that he really doesn't want overwritten. If the neighbors cat is mauling me by surprise every morning as I leave for work, the fact this only take up 10 minutes of my day is going to be dwarfed by the pall it casts over the rest.

I think we are getting too caught up in the particular details, though. See, on this particular thing, I like for my players to have narrative control. Heck, I expend a lot of energy pushing the players to take this kind of control over major parts of the game, because they are naturally inclined not to.

So I try to put myself in Wik's shoes by imagining something different niche where I'd be less than thrilled if the players took control. I guess I'd be put off if the players had game-provided abilities where they decided that my villain's main henchman was actually an undercover spy working for the party (or vice versa). Or less extreme, you rolled for treasure, and if you succeeded, it was there. (The indy game Donjon has never appealed, at all.) I'm not even that set on having control, but I do want something there before the roll happens.

 

[Dannager]

I believe what Wik finds troublesome is not that the players are writing half the story, but that they're overwriting his half as well.

It sounds to me more like his players are writing maybe 10% of the story, and he's miffed that occasionally they get to write an extra 5%, which means he only gets to write the remaining 85%.

~ let's not have any of this objectionable besmirching of some elses character, thanks. Wik is being very clear about his thoughts and doesn't need you to try to put words into his mouth. - Plane Sailing, ENworld Admin ~

And, lest we forget, there are more players than there are DMs.

 

[The Shaman]

Well, not half, but a particular niche piece that he really doesn't want overwritten.

Yep, not the whole half, but portions which are, to Wik, the province of the referee to maintain.

If the neighbors cat is mauling me by surprise every morning as I leave for work, the fact this only take up 10 minutes of my day is going to be dwarfed by the pall it casts over the rest.

Somehow I'm working this into my campaign.

See, on this particular thing, I like for my players to have narrative control. Heck, I expend a lot of energy pushing the players to take this kind of control over major parts of the game . . .

Same here, but what Wik's describing is what I think of asusing the mechanics to 'invent' changes whole-cloth in the game rather than working to achieve control as an effect of their actions.

So I try to put myself in Wik's shoes by imagining something different niche where I'd be less than thrilled if the players took control. I guess I'd be put off if the players had game-provided abilities where they decided that my villain's main henchman was actually an undercover spy working for the party (or vice versa). Or less extreme, you rolled for treasure, and if you succeeded, it was there. (The indy game Donjon has never appealed, at all.) I'm not even that set on having control, but I do want something there before the roll happens.

I think of the example of players who want a skill like Diplomacy to function like dominate.

 

[Mort]

I believe what Wik finds troublesome is not that the players are writing half the story, but that they're overwriting his half as well.

I could see this grating in heroic or even paragon, but Wik mentioned that his game is in epic levels. In epic (or at least my conceptualization of epic) there's something wrong if the players can't tell the universe to (at least ocasionally) sit down and shut up.

 

[The Shaman]

I could see this grating in heroic or even paragon, but Wik mentioned that his game is in epic levels. In epic (or at least my conceptualization of epic) there's something wrong if the players can't tell the universe to (at least ocasionally) sit down and shut up.

And as Wik has been very clear in noting, the way in which 4e handles this is not his conceptualized cup of Epic tea.

 

[NoWayJose]

I could see this grating in heroic or even paragon, but Wik mentioned that his game is in epic levels. In epic (or at least my conceptualization of epic) there's something wrong if the players can't tell the universe to (at least ocasionally) sit down and shut up.

I'd say the answer is "It depends". What happens if Hercules meets Lucifer? Can the demi-god command the Prince of Darkness to sit down and shut up with 100% probability of success?

 

[Imaro]

I'd say the answer is "It depends". What happens if Hercules meets Lucifer? Can the demi-god command the Prince of Darkness to sit down and shut up with 100% probability of success?

If he has the At-Will "Sit Down and Shut Up"... yes, yes he can and there's nothing the Morningstar can do about it.

 

[NoWayJose]

If he has the At-Will "Sit Down and Shut Up"... yes, yes he can and there's nothing the Morningstar can do about it.

I wish I had that "Sit Down and Shut Up" power on this forum. Not so much the "sit down" part, because most of us are already sitting down at our computer, but the "Shut up" part which I would use on Umbran

I'm kidding, I love you Umbran! You're more like Michael the Archangel, really.