fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Dec 30, 2013 1:26:54 GMT -8
Well, as a practicality, 'we' cannot influence or change Mike or Brian . . . Only the GM. So, having asked the question, what can the GM do? B) run a Dallas episode (it was all a dream) and don't hang back on the consequences - the adventures of the discourteous courtier and the reluctant ninja . . . Aaron Or, as they are Scorpion, have them apparently get dishonoured and cast out as Ronin, yet reveal at the end that this extreme behaviour was planned to put them into "deep cover" for the next scenario ...
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Dec 30, 2013 2:43:18 GMT -8
Its very clear that different setting (especially specific ones/era ones) require some knowledge of the setting.
You dont have to know the 'rules' but if you play a woman in a 'true' medieval setting you should know what to expect.
When you a play a courtier in a Japan setting you should also know what it means.
When you play a Fae elf (whatever that is) in your world CC then I assume the player will have received the schooling every Fae elf has received.
So no, they might not be playing wrong and the DM shouldnt tell them 'you wouldnt do that' because even when you are a rebel there are rules and norms and standards.
To extrapolate this on my mention of 'real' medieval setting and women (something I have faced) I would mention the one exception where a woman in that era can be anything other than a trophy/property/alliance material is...
Joan of Arc.
The one who claimed to have visions and ended up burned at the stake.
To play 'Jane the milk maid' and then to scoff when told by the DM 'no, your character doesnt know how to use a sword, ride a horse, talk to nobles, curtsy and in general do anything other than milk cows and cook and also no, you wouldnt throw pig shit at the Sheriff because you know your husband, children, parents and neighbors will all be hanged for it.' is foolish.
|
|
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
|
HJRP-1108
Dec 30, 2013 4:14:07 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by HyveMynd on Dec 30, 2013 4:14:07 GMT -8
I'll echo everyone who said the players have a responsibility to learn the setting. It's also the GM's responsibility to pitch the game accurately and read how interested the players seem.
We have a pretty small group over here. 5 or 6 people max. When we started things up a few years ago, we expected everyone to play in every game. And they did at first. This worked fine for D&D 4e, which is what we started with. A new person (brand new to pen & paper RPG s, too) joined our group towards the end of that campaign, and as we played Vampire the same day for a few hours before D&D, he joined that game out of convenience.
After a few sesions of Vampire, the player said the game wasn't his style. He just wanted to roll dice, kill shit, and be a bad ass, and the Vampire game was an intrigue-heavy murder mystery. This caused a lot of hassle for the Vampire GM who hd to write in, and then write out, a character into a very tightly knit story.
From then on, whenever we start a game, whomever is GMing pitches the game to the group and asks if people are interested. It's hard to not feel a little insulted when someone says they're not interested in your game (and if no one is interested, then pitch a new game) but it's better to have fewer people who want to play your game than a large number who don't.
|
|
|
Post by greatwyrm on Dec 30, 2013 5:53:48 GMT -8
I think the NPC-as-setting-guide might work, but is it really that different that the GM saying, "your character would know not to do that," over and over again? It could be. In L5R, at least, you could have some kind of household assistant npc that could do or arrange all the stuff the PC wants to do, but can't. He just jumps in and volunteers when you say something that triggers a culture warning. "I search the dead bodies." "Oh yes, my lord, I will right away." You just need an explicit agreement up front that he's an extension of the players and won't be used to lie to them or conceal information or you'll end up with the can-we-trust-the-npc? problem.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Dec 30, 2013 6:38:08 GMT -8
It is also a solution that makes more work for the GM on a somewhat permanent basis. Perhaps Brian, be more invested in the world, could shoulder some of the responsibility for initiating such an NPC!s intervention. The other elephant in the rice paddy is the reluctance if both players to EVER change their self appointed party roles regardless of system. It sounds like they play the same characters reskinned from campaign to campaign. Like Moorcocks Eternal Champion and his/her Companion living the same life over and over thru out the multiverse. Aaron
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Dec 30, 2013 7:00:11 GMT -8
You could always use the system to illustrate the consequences the courtier is bumping up against, by creating an NPC who is very similar to the courtier fellow and bringing the full weight of the cultural/societal axe down upon him.
Make an example of him, as it were.
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Dec 30, 2013 7:12:49 GMT -8
I think the point is that this would be kind of bashing the player without showing him the reason first.
I mean he is expected to read the book and know what a courtier would know in this culture/society.
There cannot be a rude courtier that does not follow protocol. Not because there aren't good and bad courtiers but because he wouldnt BE one if he wasnt following protocol.
So in this particular case there is no teachable 'moment' or benefit in bringing in an NPC. Everyone and I do mean everyone would KNOW what he is supposed to know or they wouldnt have made it to that age or profession in the first place!
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Dec 30, 2013 7:15:12 GMT -8
Head injury with partial amnesia and a personality change. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Dec 30, 2013 8:26:18 GMT -8
Yea... that or foreigner would both work. Or a prank of having a peasant pretend to be a courtier.
Just as long as the player is aware that his character would die very quickly most likely.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Dec 30, 2013 8:48:39 GMT -8
In the end for me the problem with this gaming group as I've noticed with many other dysfunctional "help me HJ your my only hope" emails is a breakdown in communication. Reading the L5R book would certainly help but only if the players and GM can agree on what aspects of this established setting they want to implement. Even more importantly if it's done in a way that in no way resembles the Simpsons Comic Shop guy...
I give as an example of how reading the book does not provide the end all solution in the various lengthy discussions amongst L5R officionados right here in these good ol' forums.
It's all apparently very up for personal interpretation and if your playing with individuals that cannot have worthwhile discussions about the direction they want the game to go no amount of setting knowledge will save it. I for one would run screaming from this groups table.
My L5R experience and apparently the Inukai group felt again times similarly...if I'm a fucking samurai I want to be a badass, flashing katana, ki shouting, Kurosawa character. One of my first posts in the L5R thread was the clip of Lucy in Kill Bill and the Battle Without Honor song. I wanted COMBAT! And then came the intrigue, the political complexities, the behind the fan whisperings, and I could feel the petulant whine building within "but I'm a FUCKING SAMURAI..."
But in the end when the big fight did come it was all the more enjoyable because of this twisted, convoluted story I'd been draw into. But never did the GM tell me I was playing it wrong and never did I tell the GM he wasn't playing the game I expected. But honestly if the game would have continued without some physical conflict for another 3-4 sessions I would have had to say something. I was new to L5R and 2/3 of that character sheet is devoted to combat not politics...I expected blood.
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Dec 30, 2013 9:28:20 GMT -8
I think L5R can suffer from the same phenomenon as cyberpunk games.
Court politics is the cyberspace of L5R.
There are certain characters that are honed to deal with it, and for the most part, the other PCs stand around and way (or perhaps try to not complicate the situation for the courtier). It's a little different, because the Courtier doesn't tend to be quite as isolated.
A duelist will always have the courtier's back (if there is one), in the event things go sideways. A shugenja has uses (whether or not such tactics might be honorable is up to debate).
Our next game has one Courtier (Dave's character, I think), which will be a first for us. I imagine the best way to handle the intrigue stuff it to allow/encourage the Courtier to crowd source all the stuff leading up to the big political scene.
Other characters can seek out information for the courtier, using their specific talents, social standing, etc. The entire party can strategize the best way to handle the situation.
In the email, this sort of arrangement would have worked very well, if Brian wasn't such a douche. His character could make suggestions prior to going into court. He could, for instance, go spying on various players in the court -- discovering who is gifting what, what each group is wanting out of the event, perhaps what sorts of things the judge(s) value, so the courtier could present memorable and appropriate gifts.
So Brian could, in character, continue to convey cultural information in a context that is far less douchey than his current method.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Dec 30, 2013 10:11:15 GMT -8
Stu Venable re: Mythus. Would WoTC have inherited the licence when it acquired TSR? What happens to it if it left buried to die with no formal support - does it eventually revert back to author? (the co-author David Newton is still alive) or, like they did with OD&D and AD&D could they do an OSRIC with the OGL? Aaron
|
|
|
Post by stork on Dec 30, 2013 10:28:06 GMT -8
To extrapolate this on my mention of 'real' medieval setting and women (something I have faced) I would mention the one exception where a woman in that era can be anything other than a trophy/property/alliance material is... Joan of Arc. The one who claimed to have visions and ended up burned at the stake. To play 'Jane the milk maid' and then to scoff when told by the DM 'no, your character doesnt know how to use a sword, ride a horse, talk to nobles, curtsy and in general do anything other than milk cows and cook and also no, you wouldnt throw pig shit at the Sheriff because you know your husband, children, parents and neighbors will all be hanged for it.' is foolish. And Hildegard of BingenIm not trying to hijack the thread, but shes a really interesting person if you don't know about here Back to the topic now. BTW isn't it Mike and Brian? Is Dave the GM?
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Dec 30, 2013 10:42:12 GMT -8
Kainguru It would depend on the details of the purchase of TSR by WotC. If the deal included "all IP," which I would assume it would, Mythus would be part of WotC's catalog. To my knowledge, there is no lack-of-use clause that would cause a copyrighted work to go into the public domain. Mythus will be public domain in the US by 2087. Hasbro *could* put Mythus under the OGL, but they don't really strike me as that altruistic.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Dec 30, 2013 11:32:37 GMT -8
From the how to play Paladin email. I noted something terrible.
The wording was something along the lines of
"I rolled SO WELL, the GM had to have me kill him."
This could just be a fault of D20 or the player's description of his action.
But having the nonlethal character kill because he rolled a "20" seems a little shitty.
Oh you did really well, let me punch you in the gut for it.
It seems to me that the nonlethal character should be killing people when he fails.
I like the idea of the nonlethal PC, and even his problem dealing with people he has killed.
However if Pathfinder is like 3.5 wont the Paladin go up in level get more +1s to Att/Dmg and ultimately roll really well more often.
Stupid D20.
In 2ed AD&D there was a subdue attack that was nonlethal, I'm sure this could be used if it wasn't already in Pathfinder.
|
|