D&D General Styles of Roleplaying and Characters

[Oofta]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA!

You absolutely insisted that mechanics can NEVER dictate your actions. You have been absolutely adamant about it.

Yet, here you are, using mechanics to determine the actions of your character.

So, which is it?

My character's in-world choice to riff off of ... umm a play he saw once ... about a crazy guy who dressed up as a bat and the completely sane dude who knows that most people are motivated by random stuff so is just being explicit about how random and meaningless life is?

Because, as I just quoted @Oofta above, the line is not clear. @Oofta repeatedly absolutely stated that he refused to use any sort of mental mechanics. That any sort of mental mechanics were 100% not appreciated. He then goes on to state that sometimes, if he is unsure of how his character will react, he will use mental mechanics.

That's my point all the way along. People make these absolute claims and then, once you start to actually scratch the surface, suddenly those claims aren't actually backed up by the facts.

But it's my choice as a player to do so, my choice on what the possible outcomes and the odds are. It's also something I use extremely rarely, just something I have used in the past even if I can't remember the last time.

Not lying. Just not examining the facts.

Right. Because you decided what the facts are, which just happen to contradict how people express their thought process. You are the sole arbiter of truth on something that's subjective.

You flat out stated that you NEVER use mental mechanics and then gave examples where you did by using random chance to make the decision for you.

So, it's all about understanding the process of decision making. If you aren't in control of emotional responses, then how can you claim that it is perfectly reasonable for your character to be 100% in control of his emotional responses. Only, he isn't, since you use game mechanics to determine his responses. Which makes claims that you never use mechanics to determine emotional and mental states kinda hard to parse.

When I have used it, it's more "I know something and understand what's going on, but would my character realize this?" But there is no one true way. If I do decide as a player to make a call based on a random roll it's not dictated by the game system. The game rules don't determine mental mechanics. As a DM I never tell a player to make a check to determine their mental state. Other players can never tell me what my decision is.

So again, apples and oranges. The player is still in total control even if I decide that my PC will flip a coin to make a decision because the character is totally aware that they are flipping a coin, it's not a metagame mechanic.

Fair enough. LIke I said, it was my personal opinion and not meant as a statement of fact. I do consider a lot of earlier D&D to be barely a role playing game. The role playing game that many of us engage in evolved despite the game not because of it. Heck, the rise of Vampire owes a considerable amount to the reaction against the way D&D was being played. But, you're right, this is getting off track. Please, let's return to the notion of how people never use mental mechanics except when they do.

I mean, so far, we have @Oofta contradicting himself. @Maxperson upthread mentioned using mental mechanics to determine NPC actions, and, presumably, would have no problems doing the same as a player. Wonder who else has done as @Oofta has and let an ad hoc mechanic (If I roll this I do X, if I roll that, I do Y) determine the mental state of the character.

I think it really is a good area to explore, because the root argument against mental mechanics is that people don't want mechanics telling them how their character feels. But, when the rubber meets the road, it's apparently fine to do it in small doses.

If it's acceptable to do in small doses, then the problem isn't with the mechanics, but, with how and when those mechanics are applied. Considering the rather broad range of ignorance of other games and how such mechanics actually look like in play, it's a fairly challenging conversation to have.

I'm only "contradicting" myself because you twist what I say into knots. I don't want the game system to dictate what my PC thinks, feels or what causes them to hesitate. What you view as consistency I view as limitations. How the player determines what their character thinks or feels, even if that means including some randomness, is completely up to them. I don't even care about PC's TIBF or alignment, it's up to them how they're used, or not.

 

[Aldarc]

Ok, I'm clearly just not getting this.

It causes me actual physical pain...to the point of blood not just leaking but squirting out of my ears...to watch streams of other people playing RPGs, but I would make that sacrifice to see an example of this in play. Any suggestions?

I will try to find an example of a Contest in Cortex Prime/Plus or something similar in Fate when I am able. I will even time stamp so you can skip over the “bad parts.”

 

[Oofta]

I will try to find an example of a Contest in Cortex Prime/Plus or something similar in Fate when I am able. I will even time stamp so you can skip over the “bad parts.”

I tried watching the Blades in the Dark ... gah. Just can't. Skipped around a bit and at the 48 minute or so mark they talk about the devil's bargain where (if I understood it) anyone can come up with something with potential negative consequences to get some kind of bonus.

Not sure I followed it though and stopped listening, I just couldn't do it any more.

 

[loverdrive]

It's a mechanic, but it's not explicitly a mental one. That same mechanic is used for every skill out there, physical or mental. It's just a mechanic.

Pretty much every example in this thread is exactly the same in this regard. There's no mechanical difference between mental and physical tests in Burning Wheel, Fate doesn't care if the aspect you compelling is called "Trap-filled dungeon" or "Anger management issues". Well, probably the only exception is PbtA games, but there everything has a different encapsulated rule.

 

[Umbran]

Having to take into consideration some metagame consideration on what my PC would do or having a contest would take me out of the zone.

Fair.

But, you know that getting in "the zone" is in part a learned skill, right? You can train yourself to more easily get into the zone, and learn to ignore distractions to stay in it - like presumably you've learned to ignore some of the distractions that come up with combat (long wait times for your turn, looking up rules, and so forth).

Which isn't to say that you would like it, just that some of the barriers you've mentioned can be removed with practice.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I assume people have heard the term of being "In the zone"? It's when you're really into what you're doing, and things are just flowing. For me it's been when I'm coding something complex and I'm just cranking out code and then I look up and notice that I was supposed to go somewhere an hour ago. It's similar to times when I'm writing (not that I claim to be an author) or even playing video games. I'm not really thinking about it, but things are just "clicking".

Having to take into consideration some metagame consideration on what my PC would do or having a contest would take me out of the zone.

In any case, I appreciate that we've actually been getting into mechanics with explanations. Doesn't really change my mind for reasons I've explained. If I get time I might watch the actual play streams.

It's no more metagame than taking 10 hitpoints worth of damage because that orc with a sword hit your Armor Class of 16.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It's funny that I agree 100% with almost every post of yours I've read, but then on this thing I'm like, 'Whoah...no THANK you.'

Just goes to show how much variety there is, I guess.

I don't try to play D&D this way, if it helps. I play other games this way, and don't try to play them the same was I play D&D.

 

[Oofta]

It's no more metagame than taking 10 hitpoints worth of damage because that orc with a sword hit your Armor Class of 16.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I need a metagame for combat, I can't imagine running a game without it that wouldn't devolve into Cops and Robbers where one kid says "I shot you" and the other saying "No you didn't".

Many, many campaigns around the world work just fine without a metagame for other aspects of the game. It's a preference.

 

[Ovinomancer]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I need a metagame for combat, I can't imagine running a game without it that wouldn't devolve into Cops and Robbers where one kid says "I shot you" and the other saying "No you didn't".

Many, many campaigns around the world work just fine without a metagame for other aspects of the game. It's a preference.

Ah, so the problem isn't the metagame, glad we cleared up that metagame isn't your problem for being "in the zone."

 

[Oofta]

Ah, so the problem isn't the metagame, glad we cleared up that metagame isn't your problem for being "in the zone."

Combat is different from non-combat. I don't need or want metagame rules outside of combat. I shared my opinion and reasoning.

I'm done with your gotcha postings trying to "win".