Started by DudesInCapes, August 17, 2011, 01:10:11 AM
Quote from: happysmellyfish on August 23, 2011, 02:26:08 AMI agree with Ron here. You need to actually talk to the players, to outline what everyone wants from roleplaying. There's no point trying to herd them into "correct" play, via in-world obstacles. In my experience, that'll just lead to a bad time for all, and potentially bad blood to boot.
Quote from: wholeridge on August 23, 2011, 11:10:18 AM "What the players want out of roleplaying" is not a valid character motivation. The characters need an in-story reason to do what the players will enjoy.
Quote from: Daniel36 on August 23, 2011, 04:44:10 PMHow is that? Character motivations are by default not valid, because the players don't play the characters because their characters want to, the players play because the players want to. Their motivation is more important than their character's motivation.
Quote from: Daniel36 on August 23, 2011, 04:44:10 PMI am not saying they shouldn't be considerate about what you want out of the game (trust me, I have suffered the same problems), but their characters really have nothing to do with the game. Yes, they are a part of a story, and I agree the story would be way more fun for all involved if it were taken seriously, but if light hearted stuff is what your players want, then light hearted stuff you should give, or find another group (or game, as suggested)
Quote from: Daniel36 on August 23, 2011, 04:44:10 PMThere is no denying there should be a middle road. If you want their characters to have a good in-story reason, then they should respect that and come up with it. But if that is not going to be enough for you, you have to reconsider the current set-up.
QuoteAs an "immersive" player, it makes perfect sense to me that the characters would take the easiest path to their goals -- just as we all do in real life -- regardless of what the players want out of roleplaying. "What the players want out of roleplaying" is not a valid character motivation. The characters need an in-story reason to do what the players will enjoy. Otherwise the characters are acting irrationally and cease to be "believable" (in the literary sense of a character being believable).
QuoteIt is true that both some games and some fiction make no attempt at meaningful character motivation, but I don't see evidence in this thread that the players being discussed want to play silly characters. On the contrary, in taking the easy path of violence -- which the GM has inadvertently left open to them -- the players are having their characters behave very realistically.
QuoteWell, yes, you might be able to scold the players into both making their characters behave differently and inventing in-story reasons for that different behavior. But if, as I suspect, the real problem is that the GM created a scenario in which bombings and beatings were the quickest route to success, then doesn't it make more sense to plug this loophole in the scenario design than to sermonize at the players?
Quote from: Roger on August 24, 2011, 12:27:21 PMI don't think this question has come up yet, so I'll ask it: Who, among yourself and your players, have read (or seen) any of the Dresden Files original source material? I may also have followup questions.Cheers,Roger
Quote from: wholeridge on August 26, 2011, 09:27:28 AMI'd like to challenge the advocates of "talking to the players" to give an example of what such a conversation would look like.
Quote from: Brimshack on August 27, 2011, 04:56:24 AMIf you do wish to push the envelope, and I realize this cuts against prior posts, then I would suggest sticking close to combat and presenting social situations which are both obligatory and closely tied to tactical concerns.E.g.s- You have to kill someone. he is in a crowded room, and you don't know who it is. The social interactions involve identifying the target while maintaining secrecy and keeping a tactically sound position.- Your goal is to protect someone. The fight will occur on someone else's initiative and social interactions go hand in hand with identifying potential threats.- Four parties are poised for battle. No one party could take them all. Negotiations will determine whether or not the odds will be poor, even, or damned good.- The party loses and they are prisoners. Luckily, there are factional differences among the enemy. Playing them off against each other through social interaction is the only way out.No these aren't real specific to DF; it's just what comes to mind when I think of spinning a little role playing for players that are gung-ho for battle
QuoteFrom reading a number of posts here at the Forge over the years, I get the idea that role-players think these discussions need to be encounter groups - ripping the emotions out, revealing long-standing trauma, hugging as they collapse into, at last, honest tears. Maybe it does have to be among role-players, although I don't think so, but it certainly doesn't have to be so among non-role-players. Let's see ...Me: OK, there are two main ways we can do this. One is more like a video game, where overcoming the monsters and traps is the point. I'd set up a maze and you guys would try to clear it, win or lose. The characters' personalities are there mainly for fun, but not a big deal. The fighting rules are really cool and part of playing would be to get better at them. The other way is more like writing a script as we go along, where the characters are in a difficult situation and have to make decisions and put their lives on the line about it. Their personalities are therefore a really big deal and you should know, I won't be able to dictate what they do or what they think is important. Oh, and don't forget, they can die in the second kind of play, too.Christopher: The second way.Dan. The second way.And that was it, and that's exactly what happened without fail, and without apparent effort or need to remind ourselves at any point - not one - during play. Also, to fend off any reader-based projection, no, I did not curl my lip or otherwise imply with my tone or expression that "video game" type play was a lesser thing. I presented the options fairly and said I was willing to do my best as DM either way.
QuoteMe: OK, there are two main ways we can do this. One is more like a video game, where overcoming the monsters and traps is the point. I'd set up a maze and you guys would try to clear it, win or lose. The characters' personalities are there mainly for fun, but not a big deal. The fighting rules are really cool and part of playing would be to get better at them. The other way is more like writing a script as we go along, where the characters are in a difficult situation and have to make decisions and put their lives on the line about it. Their personalities are therefore a really big deal and you should know, I won't be able to dictate what they do or what they think is important. Oh, and don't forget, they can die in the second kind of play, too.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on September 02, 2011, 07:18:54 PMDan (wholeridge), I have run into this issue regarding the "conscious conspiracy" before. I think it's a bugaboo worry, based on either accidental or willful mis-reading.When you say you'd like to participate in making a story (and here I mean, characters' decisions genuinely producing plot) through being deeply immersed in playing your charater, there's nothing in what you're saying which is incompatible with my notion of Narrativist play. The word I've used is "mindful," deliberately not "conscious" because of the latter term's connotation of distancing oneself from the experience.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on September 02, 2011, 07:18:54 PMThe issue I've raised, causing much anger, is that such story creation (which is not the only way to produce a story in role-playing) doesn't happen wholly by accident, and does rely on a shared, genuine desire to play in this way. I am not sympathetic to the various reasons this point upsets people. Since I'm not saying everyone has to cross their arms, look serious, and direct their characters like little pawns, and since I think that "playing my character" and "making a great story" are in this case synonyms, there's no reason for anyone to be as upset as they've been.