Moved: needed show topic
May 3, 2017 5:41:45 GMT -8
Post by Probie Tim on May 3, 2017 5:41:45 GMT -8
This topic has been on my mind since yesterday; I actually dreamed about this stuff while I was sleeping last night.
So first off, I react negatively to being called a cheater. And a thief, but that's a different issue. The term carries with it a strong component of dishonesty, and I am a bit old-school in that if you call someone dishonest and a cheat, you'd better be prepared for the consequences. That's like... duel at high noon outside the saloon, you insulted my honor type stuff. So if I sound a little raw over the issue, it's because I am.
Secondly, I think we do need to have this as a topic, but not as uncommonman puts it above. We talk about player agency all the time, but what about GM agency? How come that's never brought up? How come that's not a "thing"? It seems like we hear about is how horrible GMs are for mucking about with player agency, but we never talk about what agency GMs do have.
I think we should have a topic on that. Let's make it pro-GM, instead of anti-GM. Let's talk about what it's OK for a GM to do, instead of calling them cheats for doing something we don't think they should be able to do.
Things like:
• The GM portrays *everything* in the game world except for the player's characters: every insect, every beast, every tree, every intelligent race, every non-intelligent race, every un-describable force, every divine entity, everything that man was not meant to know. As such, the GM needs to be able to transcend the rules of the game from time to time.
• The GM has the authority to make changes to the rules if they do not fit the game and setting he is running; said changes should apply equally to players and the GM whenever possible.
• NPCs, big-bad-evil-guys, bosses, monsters, and foes of the PCs do not need to be created using the rules for creating player characters; oftentimes they will have abilities and powers which the PCs do not have, and are different than PCs by their very nature; the GM should not, however, change the NPC/BBEG/boss/monster/foe's capabilities on an ad-hoc basis during the game.
• Because the GM can sometimes transcend the rules, and because NPCs/BBEGs/bosses/monsters/foes are created as the GM wants them as opposed to using the PC creation rules, sometimes the GM will create a rule which does not apply equally to the PCs. This is OK as long as it is done with forethought, is not an ad-hoc "eff you players" thing, and only applies to the one particular circumstance for which it is created. (A fire god's fire elemental avatar may be immune to cold damage because it's an effing god's avatar, whereas other fire elementals - even PC controlled fire elementals - may not be).
• Not all die rolls made by the GM, or asked to be made by the GM, are binary success/fail rolls. Sometimes they are simply informational to help the GM make a decision (a perception roll, for instance, doesn't have to be a "perceived it/didn't perceive it" thing; the GM might have already decided the character perceived it and the roll helps the GM determine how much information to give).
• The goal of an RPG is to tell a group story. Sometimes, the dice may eff a player hard; if this happens in the first session or two, the GM should be able to make a judgement call to lessen the effect so that the story can get off the ground and the character can continue to allow the player their agency; there is no story, and there is no agency, if the character dies before they get a chance to do anything. This is not something which should be used often, or at later points in the game; it should only be used when the GM feels that a first- or second-session death puts the story in jeopardy. Yes, the GM gets to make that decision, because he's the GM.
So. There's that.
So first off, I react negatively to being called a cheater. And a thief, but that's a different issue. The term carries with it a strong component of dishonesty, and I am a bit old-school in that if you call someone dishonest and a cheat, you'd better be prepared for the consequences. That's like... duel at high noon outside the saloon, you insulted my honor type stuff. So if I sound a little raw over the issue, it's because I am.
Secondly, I think we do need to have this as a topic, but not as uncommonman puts it above. We talk about player agency all the time, but what about GM agency? How come that's never brought up? How come that's not a "thing"? It seems like we hear about is how horrible GMs are for mucking about with player agency, but we never talk about what agency GMs do have.
I think we should have a topic on that. Let's make it pro-GM, instead of anti-GM. Let's talk about what it's OK for a GM to do, instead of calling them cheats for doing something we don't think they should be able to do.
Things like:
• The GM portrays *everything* in the game world except for the player's characters: every insect, every beast, every tree, every intelligent race, every non-intelligent race, every un-describable force, every divine entity, everything that man was not meant to know. As such, the GM needs to be able to transcend the rules of the game from time to time.
• The GM has the authority to make changes to the rules if they do not fit the game and setting he is running; said changes should apply equally to players and the GM whenever possible.
• NPCs, big-bad-evil-guys, bosses, monsters, and foes of the PCs do not need to be created using the rules for creating player characters; oftentimes they will have abilities and powers which the PCs do not have, and are different than PCs by their very nature; the GM should not, however, change the NPC/BBEG/boss/monster/foe's capabilities on an ad-hoc basis during the game.
• Because the GM can sometimes transcend the rules, and because NPCs/BBEGs/bosses/monsters/foes are created as the GM wants them as opposed to using the PC creation rules, sometimes the GM will create a rule which does not apply equally to the PCs. This is OK as long as it is done with forethought, is not an ad-hoc "eff you players" thing, and only applies to the one particular circumstance for which it is created. (A fire god's fire elemental avatar may be immune to cold damage because it's an effing god's avatar, whereas other fire elementals - even PC controlled fire elementals - may not be).
• Not all die rolls made by the GM, or asked to be made by the GM, are binary success/fail rolls. Sometimes they are simply informational to help the GM make a decision (a perception roll, for instance, doesn't have to be a "perceived it/didn't perceive it" thing; the GM might have already decided the character perceived it and the roll helps the GM determine how much information to give).
• The goal of an RPG is to tell a group story. Sometimes, the dice may eff a player hard; if this happens in the first session or two, the GM should be able to make a judgement call to lessen the effect so that the story can get off the ground and the character can continue to allow the player their agency; there is no story, and there is no agency, if the character dies before they get a chance to do anything. This is not something which should be used often, or at later points in the game; it should only be used when the GM feels that a first- or second-session death puts the story in jeopardy. Yes, the GM gets to make that decision, because he's the GM.
So. There's that.