Players, GMs, and "My character"...

[Pbartender]

I wish that we could keep gender references out of this, because I think its biasing the conversation in certain ways. I think by making the 'harrassed' character female, we are engaging in subtle gender bias, not only by making the assumption that women are more likely to be victims, but in making the other player fit into a sterotype of the geek making unwelcome character advances. Let's make this more general, and try to avoid our biases where we can.

Suppose both players are males and one is playing a female character? Does this change how we see things? Does this change our estimation over whether one players in character play represented unwelcome sexual harrassment? Does this change or feelings about how 'creepy' this is, or whether someone should 'lighten up'? Actually, on second thought, I wish some other example was used entirely, because this one is freighted with all sorts of baggage.

How about an example from another recent thread? Here's the situation:

Consider a gaming group with six players.

Three of them are young and very new to the game. They play their characters wild and reckless, always trying crazy stunts in over-the-top gonzo fashion.

The other three are much older, very experienced gamer. They play in a classic, old-school style. Always very cautious and almost paranoid, looking everywhere for traps and ambushes, and taking few chances.

During the game, and out of character, the older players ridicule and deride the younger players for their daredevil choices, and attempt to dictate the actions of the younger players' characters. When the younger players ignore the advice, the older players call them "stupid".

Now, behind the scenes, the younger players are plotting revenge... They approach the DM informing him that they intend to gang up on the older players and kill all their characters in game.

So, the play styles clash horribly, the older guys are trying to tell the younger guys how to play their characters, and the younger guys are gearing up for some PvP.




The DM of the game put the kibosh on it, with the intention of holding a powwow about it out of game... Which I think is a great start.

With a little luck, the youngsters can dial it down a little bit, the oldsters can kick it up a notch, they can meet somewhere in the middle and both benefit from the other.

But it's tough to see who's actually at fault here... The youngsters for playing in such a wild style? The old guys for trying to tall them how to play more cautiously? The youngster for ignoring them? The old guys for name calling? The young guys for planning the in game assassinations? It sure gets to be a mess if you let it go too far.

 

[SteveC]

You mean like betrayal, adultery, theft, or something?

Yeah, actions might reveal that an individual is not as much of a friend as you might have thought, but I'm not so sure that the actions which are actually telling in this case are the ones you seem to think that they are.

Your response seems to underline the whole problem I have with the direction this discussion has taken - that a person playing the game differently than you means that they aren't your friend. Both sides have the assumption that any percieved slight in the game has the appropriate response of ending a friendshp.

I have found over the years that plenty of friends of the "I love you like brother" variety are not compatible with me in terms of roleplaying. Better to avoid gaming with someone like that to avoid spoiling a friendship over something as trivial as a game. Sometimes it has been me who's left the game, sometimes it was the other person, but a line eventually gets drawn.

--Steve

 

[Hussar]

As far as gender biasing anything here, I presumed that both players were male, since that's most likely going to be true. Might not be, but demographics and all.

And, it doesn't matter what Player 1 wants. Player 2, without being consulted got included in Player 1's background. Player 2 objects to this and claims that it is something he/she is totally not interested in.

For that objecting, he/she is ridiculed and his/her character is killed.

But Player 1 is not in the wrong here?

Let's keep this straight. Player 2 was minding his/her own business. Had nothing to do with this whatsoever until Player 1 made it so. When it came to Player 2's attention, Player 2 responded by saying that the idea was very much not welcome and wants it stopped.

And Player 1 doesn't stop.

Right there. Right there, that's the point where I eject someone from my table. When you've declared that your fun is more important than someone else's, I don't want you at my table. A player should be well within his or her rights to tell another player that he or she doesn't want to be included in that other player's back story in such a way.

In no way should I be forced to play out someone else's backstory without any consultation beforehand.

Now, if the players had talked beforehand, come to some sort of agreement during character generation, groovy. No problem. Or, if during character generation, one player turns to the other and suggests this, but the other player declines, that should be 100% groovy as well.

But springing this on another player during play against their express wishes? That's someone I have zero interest playing with.

 

[Hussar]

Just to add.

I've actually had this happen to me in game. I was playing with a married couple and some other friends. The wife of the couple decided to really play up a romance between a short term character that she was running and my character. Now, that romance didn't actually exist beforehand, it was just something she added in.

It made me VERY uncomfortable. It made me uncomfortable to do romance with a woman as I'm married and I'm pretty sure my wife would not approve, it made me uncomfortable to do this in front of the husband and, well, it just made me uncomfortable all the way around. I did not want to do this.

But, I also didn't want to be a dick. So, I showed willing. I played as much as I could. This lasted for several sessions. By the final session, I was dreading actually going to the game because I just totally did not want to deal with this. And I handled it very badly. I took it out in game and just blew up all over the NPC and I think the player got a bit miffed about my reaction as well.

Thinking about it now, if it happened again, my first reaction would be a quick aside to the other player and let her know I am not interested.

And I would hope that my wishes would be respected on this. The idea that I should be forced/coerced into role play that I feel very uncomfortable doing is bizarre to me.

No means no.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I really understand where you're coming from now, Hussar, the actual play example helps a lot.

We need, I think, to always approach these issues from a position of trust. Firstly we trust that the idea - the romance in this example - is coming from a genuine desire to improve the game and not any ulterior motive. Secondly when a player says that something is making them uncomfortable, we have to trust that statement too.

Some people are totally fine with an IC romance while their SO is at the table and some people are totally not fine with it. Both attitudes are completely reasonable.

 

[S'mon]

I wish that we could keep gender references out of this, because I think its biasing the conversation in certain ways. I think by making the 'harrassed' character female, we are engaging in subtle gender bias, not only by making the assumption that women are more likely to be victims, but in making the other player fit into a sterotype of the geek making unwelcome character advances. Let's make this more general, and try to avoid our biases where we can.

Biases? Gender Bias?

In the real world, most RPGers are male. Most are heterosexual. Where you get an OOC sexual harrassment situation at a game table, it's usually a male harasser and a female victim. Not always, you can get a male harasser and a male victim, you can get a female harrasser and a male or female victim. But those are minority cases.

I don't know whether the genders of harrasser and harrasee matter much, but but talking about reality in terms of bias and stereotyping takes you out of the reality-based community. Which is a bad thing, IMO.

 

[S'mon]

As far as gender biasing anything here, I presumed that both players were male, since that's most likely going to be true. Might not be, but demographics and all.

IME it's fairly likely that the Lanefan/instigator player is male, and about 50-50 whether the player of the unwilling Thief is male or female.

 

[S'mon]

It made me VERY uncomfortable. It made me uncomfortable to do romance with a woman as I'm married and I'm pretty sure my wife would not approve

What on Earth was she trying to make you do?

I mean, there are so many different levels of abstraction this can be dealt with, like any other character interaction. Many games have 'romances' where the players never speak in-character and it's all done off-stage. At the other end you might be playing through emotional scenes of courtship in-character. The DM either sets the parameters (eg "some IC play, fade to black in the bedroom") or the player does, by eg being unwilling to speak in-character and just rolling dice. There's only a problem if the DM demands more than the player wants, eg the DM demands that you respond in-character to the NPC.

Edit: I see the issue here is that it was not the GM with an NPC courting your PC, but a player with a "short term character", which is a bit of an unusual situation where the game group's social contract may not have established rules.

 

[Raven Crowking]

For that objecting, he/she is ridiculed and his/her character is killed.

But Player 1 is not in the wrong here?

Hold on......I thought the thief was the creepy stalking character?

I was advocating killing the creepy stalker and taking his stuff. After all, killing creepy stalking things is what one does in a dungeon!


RC

 

[Hussar]

What on Earth was she trying to make you do?
/snip

To be 100% honest, not all that much. Pretty much standard romance stuff. Nothing heavy at all. Probably wouldn't even rate PG.

Still made me uncomfortable as all hell. I'd never really done romance in RPG's before that (and now, I'm REALLY careful about letting everyone know what's going on and asking very politely if the players would be interested in that sort of thing before treading that ground) and it just really bothered me.

Hold on......I thought the thief was the creepy stalking character?

I was advocating killing the creepy stalker and taking his stuff. After all, killing creepy stalking things is what one does in a dungeon!


RC

Got that a bit backward. Let's recap shall we?

1. Player 1 creates a character in a vaccuum and decides to make his character in love with Player 2's character.

2. Player 1 makes sure that this love interest is a secret from Player 2.

3. During the course of play, Player 2 (the Thief character) gets wigged out by Player 1 and asks him out of character to stop. He's not interested in this sort of thing.

4. Player 1 refuses to stop and continues on, to the point of making light of Player 2's request and, quite possibly, killing Player 2's character.​

And, somehow, during the course of this thread, people are blaming Player 2 in this. People seem to be saying that Player 2 is equally at fault here for not agreeing to follow Player 1's roleplay lead. I think that sums it up pretty much.