Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7533811" data-attributes="member: 6880599">An interesting thing here on player agency. If you take the power of a characters stats choices or you make a player do what the other player wants … your stealing player agency either way. - As a Face who was proficient with persuasion I have had my GM make my character auto-fail all social arguments because I was not persuasive enough as a player... completely ignoring my characters stats... So I asked him, when the fighter makes a strength check, you don't make him lift so see how strong he is first, when a Druid makes and animal check you don't make him give your dog his pills first, so why is it that you make the face argue as a player to convince an NPC and why do you make the rogue player describe in step by step narration how to investigate or preserve enemies as a scout but then just roll for disarming traps? Why not make the player actually pick the lock? It's highly inconsistent and it devalues curtain player skills because the skills don't matter at your table the player have to do it in reality to count. Skill checks are skill checks and should 100% of the time require a role (that actually matters with a preset DC, not just for show with an auto fail) or the GM is meta gaming a crime of which GMs hold players accountable.- On the other hand, Players should be able to play their own characters. IF the face asks the Barbarian to give him all his gold for no reason and roles persuasion with expertise vs a -8 wisdom without incite.... he can basically control the other players character this is not PVP, as in PVP both players maintain control of their characters with the rules. No this is handing one players character to another player and making the player without a character watch as the character they invested in is doing something they would never do given player agency. It is different to over ride the mind of a player then to out power them physically or mind control them with a spell as a player still owns the character when they own the will even if the body does not follow their will. In general mind control abilities are the hardest on players regardless but they should be left to player interpretation. A social check should be about compromise not controlling other players characters. Lets say, your Face wants all the Barbarian's gold, he asks he gets a skill check, he wins, however the barbarian doesn't want to give his gold away... he does however want to get the face more gold so instead of giving the Face his gold he steals it from another PC in the party (with a successful strength skill check ripping it off their side and handing it over)… so the face gets his gold but the barbarian loses his and the player who lost the gold didn't lose it to a social skill check taking away player agency but a physical skill. This then causes the Face to have to justify himself since the 3rd player is like "what they hell!", The barbarian "he needs this more than you.", and the Face now has disadvantage on social checks vs the 3rd party member who saw this happen and blames him. Then you look at your players and say I will not stop the PVP this will lead to if you start engaging each other that can be fun too but when you start killing each other and get attacked a man down on the next encounter don't blame me for being under powered as a group … Also, if I have a player that's always starting PVP problems instead of a rare one off, I would pull them aside as tell them look, your hurting other players fun... once in a while it fine, but If I feel like your hurting the overall play of the group I am going to have to either kick you from the group or create divine intervention when you start causing problems and nether of us want that so please keep your character in check so I don't have to.</blockquote>

Verification