D&D General Styles of Roleplaying and Characters

[Hussar]

(Note to self: when you want to drop out of a conversation, don't keep following that conversation, because you may just not be able to resist jumping back in.)



Ok, so let me get this straight: your argument is demonstrated by a line from Lord of the Rings? That somehow LotR is actually a session log from a roleplaying game, and that all those residents of Gondor are actually Player Characters, not NPCs?

And you deliver this..."logic"...with mocking derision?

Really?

Yes, because this is the sole, only example of this that has come up in this thread. Oh, wait, no it isn't. The oft repeated mantra of "If it's magic it's okay" has been pretty prevalent throughout the thread.

 

[Lanefan]

We are told that, when Gandalf took command of the defence of the city of Gondor, wherever he came men's hearts lifted again. That seems to me a change in those men's feelings.

A change caused by that setting's equivalent of a divine blessing*, as an always-on aura effect around Gandalf quite similar to the 1e Paladin's always-on protection from evil 10' radius gained at (I think) 7th level. It's not a spell, but it is magic.

* - Gandalf is, after all, the setting's equivalent of an angel.

 

[Lanefan]

So why did he leave? Despite her expressly imploring him not to?

To see if he could? To (try to) show his independence one last time? Does it matter?

 

[chaochou]

I don't follow. Why can't there be any inspiration without mental mechanics?

Player A: "I give a rousing speech!"
Player B: "I'm inspired!"
DM: "So are all the NPCs!"

What's the problem here? (And this totally ignores the distinction between using mental mechanics on NPCs, and using them on PCs.)

Here's the problem:

Player A as Gandalf: I give a rousing speech
Other players: We control our characters and we're not inspired
GM: Nor are the NPCs
Player A: Don't I get a roll?
All: No. That would be mind control.

 

[Aldarc]

A change caused by that setting's equivalent of a divine blessing*, as an always-on aura effect around Gandalf quite similar to the 1e Paladin's always-on protection from evil 10' radius gained at (I think) 7th level. It's not a spell, but it is magic.

* - Gandalf is, after all, the setting's equivalent of an angel.

Except it doesn't work on me because I choose to not be inspired by his magic aura. I refuse to let my character's actions be bound by either the fiction or mechanics of the game.

 

[pemerton]

Ooh...you're right. I meant "character" not "player" emotions. As in, "dictate to the player what their character's emotions are." My bad.

But now we have no comparison to Gandalf or Saruman. All we have is authorship of some shared fiction. All RPGing involves this. It's no more sinister to ask you to play a scared character than to play a hungry one than to play a hurt one. (Just to choose possible outcomes of, respectively, a morale-type mechanic, a starvation-type mechanic and an injury-type mechanic.)

 

[pemerton]

A change caused by that setting's equivalent of a divine blessing*, as an always-on aura effect around Gandalf quite similar to the 1e Paladin's always-on protection from evil 10' radius gained at (I think) 7th level. It's not a spell, but it is magic.

* - Gandalf is, after all, the setting's equivalent of an angel.

Gandalf rouses their spirits by speaking to them. He changes how they feel because he is charismatic, and inspiring.

To suggest that the best way to model this is via some supernatural effect that is alienated from the actual emotions and desires and personalities of those whom he inspires is already to have abandoned any attempt at genre emulation.

If that's the best D&D can do, then D&D would be an almost indescribably shallow game. Fortunately for D&D, it's not the best it can do - as is shown by significant chunks of 4e, and by the not-as-robust-but-at-least-it's-there Inspiring Leader and similar stuff in 5e. (I think even AD&D, with its paladins' auras, is not as feeble as all that despite the best efforts of 2nd ed AD&D to make it seem so - but that would lead down another tangent about the relationship between (i) a paladin's aura and alignment, and (ii) alignment and individual personality.)

 

[pemerton]

Except it doesn't work on me because I choose to not be inspired by his magic aura. I refuse to let my character's actions be bound by either the fiction or mechanics of the game.

Your post is a working out of my alienation point: ie the only rebuttal is to say that Gandalf can "inspire" you even though your own true personality does not accept the inspiration. It's a complete reversal of what JRRT is actually depicting.

 

[pemerton]

To see if he could? To (try to) show his independence one last time? Does it matter?

It seems like you didn't read @Xetheral's posts to which I was responding. I read Xetheral as asserting that, at least in the context of RPGing, any change in a character is - or is experienced by Xetheral as -9 a redefinition of that character. And I asked whether that view generalises, eg to the Han Solo example.

I don't understand how you see your posts as relating to that issue: eg are you saying that a player of Han Solo is at liberty to redefine the character? Or are you saying that it is not a redefinition, to have him change his mind and come back and save Luke and the Rebellion? Or what?

 

[Oofta]

To see if he could? To (try to) show his independence one last time? Does it matter?

But ... but ... the whole argument here is that Star Wars is actually a D&D game along with "people can't possibly have complex characters without game mechanics that can force the players to have their character do something they wouldn't otherwise do!" Keep up.