Players refusing to play within GM's ruling/narrative?

[kigmatzomat]

I don't quite comprehend the situation, neither in what the DM is expecting nor the player. The boss NPC can either say

a) "nuh-uh, I'm not paying these expenses." (Skill check DC:unpossible)
b) "I'll pay the expenses if the book pays off." (Skill check DC: hard)
c) "I'll pay the expenses now but you're fired if the book doesn't pay off." (Skill check DC:irritate the DM)

I am baffled by what the player thinks their PC might do to make things better. The fact is that GAAP is pretty specific on what should get paid for expenses and even the bestest diplomacy roll doesn't get people to risk jail time for you.

At most I'd say make a Diplomacy check and at best the boss might give you a percentage of the book deal in return for paying you absolutely none of your expenses. Hey, you believe in the book deal, right?

 

[sniffles]

What's the point of calling it a role-playing game if all you're going to do is roll a die? This is one of those things that can go both ways depending on what you want out of the game. Neither way is right or wrong in the end; it comes down to tastes.

For my money, I want the role-play and that's how I run my games. My players all understand this and it works for us. The day they refuse to role-play is the day I cancel my game in favor of a MMORPG.

Do you tell your players not to bother putting any ranks in social skills because you're never going to ask them to make social skill checks? Do they fail their Listen checks if they fail to hear you ask for a check?



I think both the GM and player were at fault. The GM needed to make clear what his expectations were, and the player shouldn't have flatly refused without discussing the situation a little further.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I agree with your roomate 100%. She spent time and skill points and he wouldn't let her use them. (That's the real problem with roll-play vs. role-play these days. What's the point of having a skill system if the GM can ignore them whenever he wants? Just because a character has a zillion ranks in Diplomacy doesn't mean the player does.)

I read it as, the GM couldn't tell the player what to roll because she hadn't told him what she planned to do in order to make sure the book deal went through.

It's like a D&D player saying "I want to get some treasure," and the DM saying, "how are you planning to do that?" Then the player responds, "hell if I know. Tell me what I need to roll to see if I get treasure, and then tell me how much I get."

 

[IcyCool]

I read it as, the GM couldn't tell the player what to roll because she hadn't told him what she planned to do in order to make sure the book deal went through.

It's like a D&D player saying "I want to get some treasure," and the DM saying, "how are you planning to do that?" Then the player responds, "hell if I know. Tell me what I need to roll to see if I get treasure, and then tell me how much I get."

That's the impression I was getting, but as I couldn't really tell what was going on, I asked for further clarification.

 

[Arnwyn]

Chalk me up as another who doesn't understand the situation or the DM's expectations.

The fact is that GAAP is pretty specific on what should get paid for expenses

But: A reference to GAAP for TEH WIN!

 

[Orryn Emrys]

I agree with your roomate 100%. She spent time and skill points and he wouldn't let her use them. (That's the real problem with roll-play vs. role-play these days. What's the point of having a skill system if the GM can ignore them whenever he wants? Just because a character has a zillion ranks in Diplomacy doesn't mean the player does.)

I had a discussion about this factor with one of my players recently. My games are extremely roleplay-oriented, and it turns out that the common impression amongst my players was that dropping points into Diplomacy and similar skills was a waste of resources since I never ask for rolls... but no one wanted to approach me about it, concerned, apparently, that it would be received as a criticism that might alter my approach to a game they are enjoying immensely as is. The event that inspired the discussion, interestingly enough, was a DM training session with one of my players, who wants to improve his refereeing and has offered me the ultimate bump to my ego by asking me to share my own tricks and methods. It was when I demonstrated how I make these rolls for them, modified to some small degree by the efforts they make during gameplay, that he let me in on the discussion.

I don't believe in providing the means for player characters to improve their skills and then ignoring them.... I also don't like the rolls to become the focus of a scene, however, particularly with a social or 'roleplaying' encounter. I like to see the player's efforts incorporated into the scenario, but I don't simply allow a suave player to accomplish things his socially inept PC is incapable of, any more than I would allow a clueless player to invalidate the hard-won glibness of her character.

Obviously, this led to a decision to discuss my methods with the group as a whole, since I want to retain their trust in my decisions and faith in the system I provide for them. It was an educational discussion, to say the least.

 

[Shalimar]

People are ignoring the fact that they already spent a session roleplaying things out to get the contract in the first place. THEY ALREADY ROLEPLAYED IT OUT. The only thing left to find out is whether or not the public buys the book, and that is a function of time passing unless the DM wants them to somehow go out and promote the book in which case the DM did a spectacular job of not conveying that. The characters already put the effort in, its up to the gm to decide if the book succeeds or fails at this point.

 

[Mallus]

There have to be better ways of negotiating that situation than telling the DM 'No!'.

If there's that little faith in the DM on the part of that player, they should fiind another, or run something themselves.

 

[Timeboxer]

Seriously. I had a player do something similar (I believe his words were "Is this going to be a problem?"), and things would have gone much easier and smoother had I just booted him. That said, I still have no idea how I would have gone about doing that.[/i]

The tricky part here is that the player and GM are dating, as noted above, so practically speaking "ask her to leave the game" is out as an option.

 

[IcyCool]

The tricky part here is that the player and GM are dating, as noted above, so practically speaking "ask her to leave the game" is out as an option.

Ah. I suddenly suspect that the problem has nothing to do with the game...