|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 17, 2012 5:35:33 GMT -8
Skills.. You go downstairs and land in front of the office door. From there you can see directly into the parlor, to your right. Thief tries to burgle a whorehouse. He is inside, known to people as a visitor, (not known as a thief), and decides to gain some money by stealthily breaking into the office and stealing whatever easy money there is. Roll Stealth: fail. He is seen. Someone has entered the parlour and speaks. Can I help you? Roll Bluff: 20! .... now give me some dialogue. English is not the first language of the player but it is the language of the game table. He is reticent and a little self-conscious because he's playing with three other native English speakers. His PC can feel as confident as he wants at my table but if he says nothing he loses his 20.... Give me some dialogue. We are role-playing. Uhm, Well, I forgot something in the office and Joe said I can just get it. It is not the most convincing lie or delivery in real life but his roll informs the GM (me) who he meets: the new girl, a little stupid, self absorbed... what's her name? (consult name chart: Cheryl). This 20 provides me with an NPC and a scrap of her personality. The end result at the table should lead to the player, playing his first game with the group by the way, becoming more at ease with role-playing at the table. Also, playing it out for the spectators at the table also reinforces a key component in (only my?) RPGs to the other players: you can say nothing stupid in a role-playing game... Other resultsCan I help you? Yeah, Joe wants me to bring the contract for the Inn to him so he can re-negotiate the cut they receive. He's with the Innkeeper now and sent me to get the document. And you are who again? (after a Bluff fail) A critical fail is when the thief meets the house Madame. And it can end badly. Such is the dumb luck of the risk but the role-playing is (I consider) sacrosanct to role-playing. We don't do Monopoly at my table. [glow=red,2,300]------------[/glow] My game with min-maxers yesterday defines the opposite of role-playing for me. Player Character has a combat decision to do but is Chaotic Neutral. Player is a university professor of risk assessment in real life and rolls hi-low dice. to decide. (And that is a 50-50 on a nine point alignment scale.... as an aside). - - - - - - Player: "PC name spoken" checks the room. Rolls. 20! What do I find. GM: under the rug you find a hidden slip of paper with the names of the (NPCs just killed) contact list. Behind the southwest corner you find the muddy boots stuck behind the bed. Inside the room's closet, you find the mannequin used as a decoy and, looking at the mannequin you find an opening that you think is a secret compartment that contains the poison darts used in the assassination. Player: How many darts GM: 20 GM: you also find 200 gold pieces in the drawer of the night table. GM: What do the rest of you do. Under my breath: I watch this train wreck happen. - - - - - - Player distances himself from his PC by speaking in 3rd person constantly. New player in the room. Descriptions: Cleric: I am dressed in a well travelled, baggy cassock tied by a rope sash around my waist. This does not let you see what I am carrying underneath. I have grey hair, blue eyes and a scar down the left side of my face, which you can see because my hood is pulled back. I am about 5'8." Out-of-character comment from another: so he looks like his character. laughs from the table Player: "PC" is a badass. You think "PC" is a wizard because he is dressed like one even though he is not a wizard because he only thinks he is a wizard... So he is wearing wizard stuff. Essentially this player is watching the game. He will never become a role-player. (cf my rationale for my thinking in blue above)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2012 6:06:53 GMT -8
I'm currently running Jade Regent in Pathfinder for my group... I run my skill challenges exactly the same way you do. I've got a bit of a mixed group - 1 pure thespian - 1 total min-maxer and two blends. My min-maxer sounds exactly like yours... On the other side of the coin - my thespian player is a member of a local improv troupe who performs every week... ie Who's Line Is It Anyway... She is playing a "Paris Hilton" character - Whiny, self-absorbed "Oh I broke my nail" kind of character - but to the point of not getting involved in combat because "Ewww Rats... I'm not going in THERE..." basically putting the responsibility of keeping the party alive on the other three characters. She is a great role-player - and I'm hoping the she "grows" her character into being something useful... we'll see... if not... she might have to meet an untimely end...
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Sept 17, 2012 6:43:14 GMT -8
That is exactly my feeling on the situation.
1. If they give me some dialog and even make an attempt to ROLE play they get bonuses.
2. If they just want to throw dice at the problem they get their die roll but they don't get the bonuses.
3. If they fail in either, they get to tell me how they fail (usually).
4. If they munchkin part 3 then I get to decide and that's usually not good for them.
Just my 2 krupplenicks on the subject, your mileage may of course vary.
JiB
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 17, 2012 7:32:05 GMT -8
I just thought I would remind you all that, unlike boardgames and chess, there is no wrong way to role-play: This answer about division of treasure via eMail - treasure also given via eMail.... after all we all take 10 on our search roll. Sunday GM all basic equipments, potions up to 3rd level and magic items (such as sword, amulets, armors, etc) up to +1 bonus can be found normally in shops - this is a cosmopolitan capital of 10.000 inhabitants afterall - which doesn't mean there's "Ye old magic shops and paraphernalia" that has all the items, simply the characters invest a certain amount of time wandering around the city and in different shops until they find what they need. Since we meet for few hours every now and then, i personally consider a waste of time roleplay ALSO the part in the shops. So, should I ask anything from a shopkeeper somewhere or can we just roll Gather Information and be done with it? Transferring GM data to PC information is not part of role-playing I guess. This game is a passive video game of spreadsheets. My God, I have to say, D&D has changed since the AD&D 1e player skill days of resource management. Hand wave time. Hand wave encumbrance. Hand wave role-play. This stuff interfers with the game flow and hand waving this extraneous stuff encourages new players to enter the role-playing hobby. Hopefully they will become GMs one day.... maybe game designers eventually. No single game or group of mechanics (what some might call system apart from GM) promotes this. The hobby itself promotes it. Keep it in mind the next time you role dice. Give me a +1 if you see the irony here. This stuff begs to be corrected.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 17, 2012 10:01:15 GMT -8
With skills I'm too 'old school' at times . . . Tell me what you are doing then I can apply modifiers to a skill roll . . . IF a skill roll is needed. Eg: "I look in the top left hand drawer of the desk" . . . "you find a notebook" . . . "I read the notebook beginning with the last entry" . . . Major clue number one is give without a single roll because that's where it was. With respect to intelligence/IQ . . . Well it was very interesting because in 45 mins you ran the entire spectrum of psychological argument of the last 45 years regarding exactly this particular psychometric test and it's applicability. Currently, despite claims to the contrary from certain pundits, 'what is intelligence?' remains unanswered. Cognition and IQ and creativity are not synonymous . . . There maybe observed correlations but . . . "a correlation does not a causation (or relationship) make" (I have a rock I believe keeps tigers away and I have never seen a tiger in my backyard in the UK . . . It correlates but the two are actually unrelated . . . My faith in my rock is actually a delusion . . . Acknowledgment to the Simpsons are due for this example). Psychometric tests themselves are suspect and have actually been appropriated and applied in a manner far and away from their original intent . . . But that's a debate for another age (though if anyone is interested they can read one of my dissertations on psychometric testing and contemporary psychology - pm me and I'll forward it on . . . Though to be honest it's not exactly a riveting read unless you like psychology). Tappy comes closest to identifying what 'most' psychologists would agree on as being 'intelligence' . . . In game terms there is a very easy compromise that dispenses with having to play dumb or the opposite . . . Intelligence is simply a measure of your ability to process information (remember things and recall things) and see some patterns more readily. It is NOT smarts or cunning, it is NOT education . . . Intelligent people can be uneducated, smart/cunning individuals do not have to be intelligent. A real world example . . . While my mother worked at the university she saw two post graduate students known to be highly intelligent set about dismantling a door in the student union building . . . Because it would open to let them out when they pushed against it . . . The janitor looked at them both and pulled the door open and carried on outside . . . IQ or smarts? (sounds like an urban myth, I know, but it actually happened). Cognition is totally separate from IQ . . . It's about describing the actual process of thought not how well one might or might not think. Cognition is essentially a description of the sub routines that describe/construct the software that runs on the organic hardware we call our brain. So, 'in game' you can roll to say recall a detail but NOT to solve a problem . . . Anyone can problem solve given the right set of tools and instruction (scientific process, logic,etc etc etc are all examples of problem solving processes sans thinkers genius or lack of). Intelligence would govern a speed of response . . . But it's like a computer . . . The data is processed faster to reach a solution but the process itself is 'dumb' and, at this point in technological development, computers do not demonstrate that which we often mistake for intelligence - Sentience!!! (thus the Turing test to measure when our future mechanical masters reach this threshold). So solve the problem, that's your cunning your insight not your intelligence . . But to find a book reference in a library you visited 10 years ago . . . Grab the dice and we'll see if you can recall the details . . . Apologies for the rambling incoherence at times. I'm trying to write this at work . . . When I should be working . . .
|
|
daniel
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 217
|
Post by daniel on Sept 17, 2012 14:03:00 GMT -8
Is there any reason why this episode did not pop up on www.rpgpodcasts.com/ ? Its ware i usualy look because it follows all the ones i do listen to, up to now Happyjacks did update there. Just wondering if its on there end or if i am just missing it
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Sept 17, 2012 17:51:14 GMT -8
She is a great role-player - and I'm hoping the she "grows" her character into being something useful... we'll see... if not... she might have to meet an untimely end... Eh. I kind of disagree with you. From the little I've read about this player, it seems the thing she enjoys most about the game is acting as her character. I'm the same way, and would do exactly the same thing you've described her doing. "Eww... rats! I'm not going in THERE..." because that's what the character would do. Before starting the game Frank, did you sit down with everyone and go over what type of game you'd be playing? After a failed game a few years back, I really think this is the absolute first thing any group should do when starting a new game; discuss the tone and style of the game and what types of characters would be appropriate for it. If you didn't do that, then I think it is unfair for you to deem her character as not being useful. I've mentioned this experience before, but the Savage Worlds game my group tried (and the game that sparked my "Why do you guys like Savage Worlds?" email that then lead to the whole discussioin of whether SW s good for fantasy in season 6) was described by the GM as being "like A Game of Thrones but with exotic locales". So I made a completely social character with virtually no combat ability. In my mind, one of the major elements of A Game of Thrones it's high level of social interaction and intrigue. Words are usually more dangerous than swords in that book series, and so I thought my character would be appropriate. Turns out the GM had planned this epic quest of globe-trotting adventure with lots of action and not much chance for social interaction. I mean, we could interact with NPCs of course, but we'd always head off to the next town/city/country after gathering our latest clue. There would never be a chance for my PC to climb the social ladder and become the behind the scenes operator that I envisioned her being. After struggling for two sessions, we all sat down and had a talk. That's where I found out what the GM's plan for the story was, and where he learned what I had been trying to do. Turns out just about everyone at the table had been coming at the game from different angles and was expecting different things from the story. After our talk, I completely revamped my character into something that was more appropriate for the type of story we were playing. So if you haven't done this with the thespian player and her Paris Hilton-type character, I think you should. It's not fair to her for you to write her character off as being useless, and hint that you'll kill her character off. Pull her aside and explain why you think her PC doesn't fit the story currently being run. Explain that this particular game is about adventure, and action, and combat (or whatever) and ask if she sees her character fitting into that story. If she says "Yes", then the onus in on her to make her character fit in and join the group. Alternatively, she may want to tweak the character or come up with a brand new one that is a better fit. But I really think you should give her that chance. P.S. - I'm not trying to dump on you here. I apologize if you've already talked to your player about this. I only have that one line from your post to go on.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 18, 2012 1:17:29 GMT -8
She is a great role-player - and I'm hoping the she "grows" her character into being something useful... we'll see... if not... she might have to meet an untimely end... Eh. I kind of disagree with you. Yeah really got to go with Hyvemynd with this one . . . It's like playing to your disads and that's half the fun . . . The journey is as important as the goal. For example for a oneshot 'All Flesh Must Be Eaten' I played a chain smoking paraplegic teacher with no combat skills who was also lazy ("shit son you don't think I actually read your biology paper, I just didn't like you thats why you got an F") - he co opted assistance through his lasting intimidation of former students. He'd never survive the zombie apocalypse (seriously it was a broken character with the words 'zombie food' painted on his back) but it was entertaining sitting there and saying "ah guys . . . Wheelchair . . . I've sort of got a Dalek 1.0 problem with that plan . . . "
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 18, 2012 3:42:20 GMT -8
The way I read Frank's comment is that he is referring to, what Gary Gygax referred to as, "play actors." And he is hoping for less "play acting" and more role-playing. And more role-playing and less roll playing from the other side of the coin.
These can be assumptions that players bring to the game; and how they have come to understand RPGs regardless of game. All these problems and challenges at the table really arise from no comprehensive definition of what is a role-playing game.
It seems to be taboo for the GM to have expectations on the players but not visa versa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2012 6:27:53 GMT -8
In regards to the discussion on "being unable to RP someone smarter than you", the best way I have found to deal with this is less on the player side, and more on the world building side. If you make incorrect but clever connection be correct in the game world using psudoscience it can give the PC the FEEL of being smarter than the player themself. If they decide to build a device that seems logical but wouldnt really work in the real world due to physics or something, let it fly. If they come up with a creative way to use a spell that the rules technically do not allow, bend the rules a bit to reward the creativity and make the character SEEM to know more by making what he knows correct rather than him knowing things that are correct to begin with.
Psudo-science is rampant throughout many genres that games are run in, and magic is in pretty much all of the rest. Handwave things like "flying without wings" and "super strength defies leverage" if a smart character with a less smart player can come up with ways that seem somewhat logical on why that is possible.
For instance, if a player is looking for a quest Item, say...a legendary sword called Orcslayer, and they say something semi-logical like, "People probably used it to slay Orcs, lets go to the nearest orc-populated area to begin our search", the put the sword in that area to make thier character's ok logic look like awesome logic
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 19, 2012 6:59:34 GMT -8
In regards to the discussion on "being unable to RP someone smarter than you", the best way I have found to deal with this is less on the player side, and more on the world building side. If you make incorrect but clever connection be correct in the game world using psudoscience it can give the PC the FEEL of being smarter than the player themself. If they decide to build a device that seems logical but wouldnt really work in the real world due to physics or something, let it fly. If they come up with a creative way to use a spell that the rules technically do not allow, bend the rules a bit to reward the creativity and make the character SEEM to know more by making what he knows correct rather than him knowing things that are correct to begin with. Psudo-science is rampant throughout many genres that games are run in, and magic is in pretty much all of the rest. Handwave things like "flying without wings" and "super strength defies leverage" if a smart character with a less smart player can come up with ways that seem somewhat logical on why that is possible. For instance, if a player is looking for a quest Item, say...a legendary sword called Orcslayer, and they say something semi-logical like, "People probably used it to slay Orcs, lets go to the nearest orc-populated area to begin our search", the put the sword in that area to make thier character's ok logic look like awesome logic I am on board with that! +1
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 19, 2012 8:58:36 GMT -8
In regards to the discussion on "being unable to RP someone smarter than you", the best way I have found to deal with this is less on the player side, and more on the world building side. If you make incorrect but clever connection be correct in the game world using psudoscience it can give the PC the FEEL of being smarter than the player themself. If they decide to build a device that seems logical but wouldnt really work in the real world due to physics or something, let it fly. If they come up with a creative way to use a spell that the rules technically do not allow, bend the rules a bit to reward the creativity and make the character SEEM to know more by making what he knows correct rather than him knowing things that are correct to begin with. Psudo-science is rampant throughout many genres that games are run in, and magic is in pretty much all of the rest. Handwave things like "flying without wings" and "super strength defies leverage" if a smart character with a less smart player can come up with ways that seem somewhat logical on why that is possible. For instance, if a player is looking for a quest Item, say...a legendary sword called Orcslayer, and they say something semi-logical like, "People probably used it to slay Orcs, lets go to the nearest orc-populated area to begin our search", the put the sword in that area to make thier character's ok logic look like awesome logic I am on board with that! +1 Yep . . . Just don't tell them that because, as pointed out in the podcast, most gamers believe themselves to be of (more?) than above average intelligence. Unfortunately normal distribution and statistics dictates that 50% of the population must fall between the 1st standard deviations above and below the mean of all scores - in simple terms 1/2 of all people are average . . . Those are pretty powerful odds (and the truly genius represent the top 2.5% of the population not the common misnomer of 5%, as that figure is actually the total of people in the population who lie at the extreme end of the total range of scores . . . Top and bottom ie: 2.5% above + 2.5% below the mean = 5% of the total population ;P ) PS: because IQ and consciousness etc is sorta my cuppa tea outside of gaming . . . For those that might be interested IQ is measured as: MA/CA x 100 = IQ MA is mental age CA is chronological age (yes Virginia your IQ can 'increase' with age . . . But the truth is the relative difference between ages - MA & CA - tends to narrow as we get older . . . )
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Sept 19, 2012 18:08:02 GMT -8
If you make incorrect but clever connection be correct in the game world using psudoscience it can give the PC the FEEL of being smarter than the player themself. I get what you're saying, and that totally works but I'd probably do it another way, personally. Call me anal retentive, but I don't like the way that solution can break the "reality" of the game world. In the games I typically run, the PCs are special for one reason, and one reason only; they're the PCs and the protagonists of the story. That's it. What I mean is, the PCs in the games I run are not supermen. They're not gods incarnate who can move mountains and cleave through armies of baddies single handedly. There will always be someone who is stronger, faster, smarter, or just simply better then they are. Maybe a lot of people will be better then they are. If a PC is really smart, and the player wants them to invent a way to fly without wings for example, then why hasn't someone before them come up with the idea already? If the thing they're trying to do is completely out of place for the setting, then it doesn't matter how smart they are. I would deter them from attempting that action. For example: Player: "My PC's a genius, so I'm going to invent MAGIC!" DM: "Yeah... we're playing a 1960's hardboiled film noir detective game. Magic doesn't exist in this setting." Player: "That's because no one was smart enough to figure it out until now. My PC is. So now there's MAGIC. I can make stuff disappear!" DM: "How's this for a disappearing trick. Get the hell out of my game." That's an extreme example, but you get the point. In my opinion, being super smart should not allow you to bend or break the laws of reality for the setting.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 20, 2012 2:37:46 GMT -8
In the games I typically run, the PCs are special for one reason, and one reason only; they're the PCs and the protagonists of the story. That's it. What I mean is, the PCs in the games I run are not supermen. They're not gods incarnate who can move mountains and cleave through armies of baddies single handedly. There will always be someone who is stronger, faster, smarter, or just simply better then they are. Maybe a lot of people will be better then they are. Absolutely
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Sept 20, 2012 6:30:28 GMT -8
Here's the way I implement what I was talking about on the podcast about a mechanic for dealing with a character who is smarter than the player.
I don't generally ask for an int check or a wisdom check from the player. I don't give them answers. I give them clues or hints that might lead them in the right direction. I try to write the game in such a way that even I could pick up on what's going on. (If I can pick up on what's going on anybody can.)
If the player asks for some help or some insight I'll give it to them without rolling.
If the players are floundering I will try to aim them in the right direction again without rolling.
Where this mechanic mostly comes into play is for me as a player, and I keep it low key and don't broadcast that I'm doing it.
If as a gm I want a player to make such a check I'll send them a note asking them to make the check and note the result and give it back to me. Since I send lots of notes around the table throughout the game this will not strike the other players as amiss.
Basically I'm using the same conceptual mechanic as knowledge checks or skill checks for things like insight and intuition.
Cheers,
JiB
|
|