Sorry about the Matt Finch thing. I have a question. What do you do when your anti-mother-may-I stance doesn't work out. Like a guy reaches into his hotel closet and pulls out a bazooka. I feel like the answer is you say no and you talk about it, but I'd be interested in hearing your response, just don't cop out and say vetting prevents that. :)
Before I can answer then, I'd need to now all the specifics about the game being played, the rules being used, its setting, its theme, its tone, who all are the player characters and npcs involved, what has happened already up until this point, what is happening in the current scene, why is someone pulling a bazooka out of a closet?
My players are in-character. And their characters are character-driven. So whatever is happening in a session is just things that would make sense. Nothing would need calling out by another player.
Ok so I have an example (I didn't think it would take long to find one, honestly), re: players creating things instead of playing Mother May I.
I framed the start of session as arriving at a train station (departing from station), to get established on the planet (characters previously met, but no in character play has happened). The player moved the team to a hotel and stated that they had gotten a suite for a client meeting. I told them that the types of creation that they are able to do is stuff within the hotel, like beds, pools, business lounge, restaurant, bars, crispy ales, etc., but they can't just state that they have a client meeting set up. So, firstly, is that reasonable, and secondly how do you even define the limits in terms of what is player vs gm domain?
Anyways, I'm working on getting better here. Luckily it's a pbp game so I can handle things at a leisurely pace, but the idea is to generate/embellish a setting for use in live play, and I've found that witnessing the role play from the characters has actually been really good as well.
Firstly, thanks for your comments in the video regardless, as it's solid commentary.
Secondly, I'm practically an infant when it comes to roleplaying, even though I've been in it since the 90's, just very sporadically, so I don't have a case law or anything. Social contracts are developed through experience I guess and I don't have a solid draft.
Thirdly, let's suppose that I had a social contract and it said they could invent patrons. I assume that would be a bad social contract, so you can still discuss optimal games, otherwise you end up in the "as long as you're having fun" territory.
But again, thanks for the comments, as I feel it's somewhat of an admonishment to deal with the hard framing from station to hotel, and while it took a while to sink in, it was worth it.
Honestly all I was trying to do was to get them to talk and introduce the setting, and that could easily happen at the hotel, but it felt off (because it was off).
Anyways, just to recap on the rpg related discussion: I'm sad about the computer AI videos being lost, but I understand. Maybe you can post your social contract, if you feel like it. Again, I feel like a player introducing a patron meeting with zero context is dirty pool, regardless of social contract, and I would be interested in finding out more about where you draw the limitations in your game because on the one extreme is mother may I, and on the other is chaos. What's a good boundary line before chaos?
Sorry about the Matt Finch thing. I have a question. What do you do when your anti-mother-may-I stance doesn't work out. Like a guy reaches into his hotel closet and pulls out a bazooka. I feel like the answer is you say no and you talk about it, but I'd be interested in hearing your response, just don't cop out and say vetting prevents that. :)
ReplyDeleteBefore I can answer then, I'd need to now all the specifics about the game being played, the rules being used, its setting, its theme, its tone, who all are the player characters and npcs involved, what has happened already up until this point, what is happening in the current scene, why is someone pulling a bazooka out of a closet?
DeleteThanks for the reply, I guess I'll let you know if/when it happens.
DeleteMy players are in-character. And their characters are character-driven. So whatever is happening in a session is just things that would make sense. Nothing would need calling out by another player.
DeleteHow about internal monologs from characters?
DeleteBefore we start a game, we decide if thinking out loud will be used or not. Some players don't care about what other characters might be thinking.
DeleteOk so I have an example (I didn't think it would take long to find one, honestly), re: players creating things instead of playing Mother May I.
DeleteI framed the start of session as arriving at a train station (departing from station), to get established on the planet (characters previously met, but no in character play has happened). The player moved the team to a hotel and stated that they had gotten a suite for a client meeting. I told them that the types of creation that they are able to do is stuff within the hotel, like beds, pools, business lounge, restaurant, bars, crispy ales, etc., but they can't just state that they have a client meeting set up. So, firstly, is that reasonable, and secondly how do you even define the limits in terms of what is player vs gm domain?
Anyways, I'm working on getting better here. Luckily it's a pbp game so I can handle things at a leisurely pace, but the idea is to generate/embellish a setting for use in live play, and I've found that witnessing the role play from the characters has actually been really good as well.
:( The real question there was, should a player have the creative capacity in a game to declare that a patron is incoming.
DeleteThings like that are decided on by the group before starting a game.
DeleteFirstly, thanks for your comments in the video regardless, as it's solid commentary.
DeleteSecondly, I'm practically an infant when it comes to roleplaying, even though I've been in it since the 90's, just very sporadically, so I don't have a case law or anything. Social contracts are developed through experience I guess and I don't have a solid draft.
Thirdly, let's suppose that I had a social contract and it said they could invent patrons. I assume that would be a bad social contract, so you can still discuss optimal games, otherwise you end up in the "as long as you're having fun" territory.
Bad social contracts are ones that the really good players won't agree to, I guess. Players need to help in making what the social contract will be.
DeleteBut again, thanks for the comments, as I feel it's somewhat of an admonishment to deal with the hard framing from station to hotel, and while it took a while to sink in, it was worth it.
ReplyDeleteHonestly all I was trying to do was to get them to talk and introduce the setting, and that could easily happen at the hotel, but it felt off (because it was off).
ReplyDeleteIf I had to guess about the cards in the Monte Cook game, likely something to do with showing discomfort through cards instead of talking.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, just to recap on the rpg related discussion: I'm sad about the computer AI videos being lost, but I understand. Maybe you can post your social contract, if you feel like it. Again, I feel like a player introducing a patron meeting with zero context is dirty pool, regardless of social contract, and I would be interested in finding out more about where you draw the limitations in your game because on the one extreme is mother may I, and on the other is chaos. What's a good boundary line before chaos?
ReplyDeleteI looked for the social contract video. I guess I deleted it. I will make a new one.
Delete