Perfectibilists OOC

[SageBahamut]

Honestly I'm increasingly feeling like the entire prison sequence is nonsense. At least for me.

I see it's working for everyone else, but I personally can't engage with it. I find myself just kind of waiting for it to end.

[Conaldar]

10 minutes ago, SageBahamut said:

Honestly I'm increasingly feeling like the entire prison sequence is nonsense. At least for me.

I see it's working for everyone else, but I personally can't engage with it. I find myself just kind of waiting for it to end.

And I felt again that players would feel this way. Many players can't engage with a setting in an impactful way. It comes down to play-style. 

When I read how wtaylor2001 was dealing with it I thought that PLAYER just wanted out of the prison. So I provided outs. I mean you knew what was coming. If I was a player knowing I would start incarcerated I would definitely be looking for an out. But the prison start wasn't a surprise. You knew. If you want to drop like Oceane then so be it. Leaves us with five. But I won't apologize for doing what I said I would do. GMs abandon games usually because players make running it difficult. My response is: if you can't handle a story I clearly defined up front leaving is the best option for the group. 

 

I won't abandon my story. I know where I'm going and I'm eager to see where the PCs go once they escape. If you want to leave then you want to leave but I won't be intimidated by players who want their way.

[SageBahamut]

I'm... not asking you to? I did know. I'm not complaining about it being there. It's just... not doing anything for me, and I couldn't really have known that til we got here.

But yeah, I don't want to cause a bad time, so, off I go. Thanks for having me, and, good gaming to everyone.

[Bananaphone]

Perhaps for future reference, perhaps if we're subjected to social skills, make a suggestion to us as players what our character would be feeling. You know, like if we were around a table and the GM has the NPC start talking to a player, giving him his speech, the GM makes a roll behind the screen (obviously a skill check), 'Out of character, your character is finding what he's saying to be very persuasive; maybe it's the way he's selling it, maybe it's a point you haven't thought of before etc, which-ever it is, your character is feeling more inclined to their position.'

 

This way there is still player agency (the player gets to decide how their char arrives to that feeling), but Interaction skills matter. And honestly, both are fine with me, particularly the latter. It makes skilled NPC's more of a threat if they can charm/intimidate/deceive you instead of just punching you. It also bulwarks against the Player inclination of not believing anyone, not being scared of anyone and finding nothing persuasive except the words of their fellow players. That powerless, but highly persuasive CEO is no longer a non-threat because if you let him speak you might be vulnerable to his practiced manipulations. Just take a look at how a pudgy, powerless, middle aged man called Edgar intimidated and ran rings around Homelander, a sociopathic version of Superman who has had no qualms about killing people for just annoying him, as an example. (from The Boys)

 

That's just my 2 cents.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Bananaphone (see edit history)

[wtaylorjr2001]

Will to resist his arguments.

[Conaldar]

@Bananaphone if you read the description of how Persuasion works I'm in line:

"You’re skilled in dealing with people, from etiquette and
social graces to a way with words and public speaking,
all of which helps to get your point across, make a good
impression, negotiate, and generally win people over to
your way of seeing things."

 

Player agency does not vanish when a PC has been Persuaded to act differently. Within the greater context of M&M rules and how Persuasion works player agency IS roleplaying a character who's mind has been changed to one degree or another. It doesn't mean the PC has changed sides. It means that in the back of the PC's mind there's DOUBT. And that doubt can be eliminated by dedicated teammates that overcome the NPC's attempt at control. 

I appreciate you seeing what I'm doing here though. But my first thought is "if I need to ask permission for certain checks then will I need to ask permission for ANY check?" I'm not a fan of entitled players who think they can dictate how the rules affect their PC. SageBahamut was barely interacting with the setting as is. Last night I considered just finding another game group but I'll stay with these five PCs if we're all in agreement that NPCs can utilize interaction skills just as the PCs can. 

[Bananaphone]

Sure I don't mind the influence of interaction skills of NPC's over PC's, as I mentioned earlier, as it gives non-powered characters a means of influencing us and we have other avenues to consider instead of just a super powered fist fight.

[Conaldar]

Well it's Thursday. I need a few days just to get right after losing two players in a week. Enjoy your weekend and I'll respond to IC posts Monday.

@Bananaphone Thanks 😊

[DecoyGirl]

@Conaldar

Hmm the whole argument of Player Agency and interaction skills is and always has been a rough one, it's one of the great discussion of GMing and playing Pen and Paper.
I've always operated on the simply rules of.
#1: Yes players can be effected by interaction skills/spells.
#2: Short of Magic compulsion there are simply some arguments/positions that you just cant actually make.

• Some systems kind of go with this, like a lot will say something to the effect of "You cant convince someone to do something that would directly cause death for them" something to that effect...
• Others take this a step farther and go to the level of "You can't convince some one to do something directly against -insert vague game element-"
  • Good example of this is, you likely can't convince a paladin that this baby who doesn't show up as evil on detect evil will one day grow up into a evil warlock and thus he must kill him or allow him to be killed. that just goes directly against the characters belief system. In DnD terms we might say that it just have a Challenge Rating that's to high. But simply put some arguments have effects that just are not going to work.
    • Were good player/GMing comes in is that the Paladin might say "You are not killing this baby, but I'm going to make sure he does not grow up to be an evil warlock." You have effected the character with your interaction check but that does not mean you get exactly what you want from it. I think that is where you are coming down on.

That all has every little to do with the current issue, but just my two cents.

#3: I do think the player should have some agency in having the ability to say "My character would never do that."

• Some characters would literally never betray a friend/party member. no amount of interaction skill should be able to change that.

 

Its kind of what you said, interaction skills should effect players but it's the players job to interpret how the character reacts to those interaction checks.
The GM does need to respect that some times people (And by comparison characters) can be stubborn or illogical. Even in the face of well arguments. Now that does not mean that the character being difficult is going to be good or productive for the game however. So that should be though out also.

-

 

For my part, I'm still in on the game.
I'm also fine with the point that I have largely put myself in a area where I can't do a lot in the game. (That's fine I get that as a GM, some times cause/effect mean that some players don't have a lot to do)
I'm still very interested in the whole prison part.


We should also remember (Something that's very problematic in pbp) is that some times, the players literally just don't know what they should be doing to move the story along inside the framework of a character.

Some people are also just good as some stuff and not others and it's harder to feel that out in PbP over in person Pen and Paper.

Perfect example, I'm very good at doing the actually talking interaction part of a role playing game in person.
By contrast if you give me a "puzzle" in a pen and paper game... you better hope some one else in the team is good at it, but I'm both not good at it and my brain is going to turn off.

Looking at the whole set up in the prison at first after the 'test' of the security. (Drop kicking someone)
I'll be honest, as a player I look around and think. "Ya this is basically escape proof baring outside interference"
As the GM you have to except some times that, you might have actually stumped your players.
No idea if that is the case here, but input on the discussion.

[cbenny]

1 hour ago, DecoyGirl said:

Looking at the whole set up in the prison at first after the 'test' of the security. (Drop kicking someone)
I'll be honest, as a player I look around and think. "Ya this is basically escape proof baring outside interference"
As the GM you have to except some times that, you might have actually stumped your players.
No idea if that is the case here, but input on the discussion.

 

I think that maybe we have different ideas about the timeframe we're working with here. I have several ideas for avenues to try, however most require more information and Herbert isn't going to rush into anything. This is literally day one. Herbert is prepared to spend the next year or so plotting his escape. Getting out within the first month seems like an unrealistic goal.

 

Our characters have no reason to rush. Worst case scenario they just wait ten years and then they're out, free and clear.

[Bananaphone]

Siren doesn't age so 10 years is nothing to her lol.

 

Hell, she'd emerge with an extra 50 pp in Skills and Advantages and Attributes/Defenses, so why not 🤓.

[wtaylorjr2001]

Dice believes opportunities falls into his lap, the meeting with the inmate proves it. His luck is working. I am enjoying this game, and while sad at the loss of players, I am still here. We are still here. We can easily replace them if desired.

[SageBahamut]

So... Conaldar and I made peace and now I'm back, if the rest of the group doesn't find my presence too objectionable.

[wtaylorjr2001]

29 minutes ago, SageBahamut said:

So... Conaldar and I made peace and now I'm back, if the rest of the group doesn't find my presence too objectionable.

Excellent

[Conaldar]

17 hours ago, DecoyGirl said:

@Conaldar

Hmm the whole argument of Player Agency and interaction skills is and always has been a rough one, it's one of the great discussion of GMing and playing Pen and Paper.
I've always operated on the simply rules of.
#1: Yes players can be effected by interaction skills/spells.
#2: Short of Magic compulsion there are simply some arguments/positions that you just cant actually make.

• Some systems kind of go with this, like a lot will say something to the effect of "You cant convince someone to do something that would directly cause death for them" something to that effect...
• Others take this a step farther and go to the level of "You can't convince some one to do something directly against -insert vague game element-"
  • Good example of this is, you likely can't convince a paladin that this baby who doesn't show up as evil on detect evil will one day grow up into a evil warlock and thus he must kill him or allow him to be killed. that just goes directly against the characters belief system. In DnD terms we might say that it just have a Challenge Rating that's to high. But simply put some arguments have effects that just are not going to work.
    • Were good player/GMing comes in is that the Paladin might say "You are not killing this baby, but I'm going to make sure he does not grow up to be an evil warlock." You have effected the character with your interaction check but that does not mean you get exactly what you want from it. I think that is where you are coming down on.

That all has every little to do with the current issue, but just my two cents.

#3: I do think the player should have some agency in having the ability to say "My character would never do that."

• Some characters would literally never betray a friend/party member. no amount of interaction skill should be able to change that.

 

Its kind of what you said, interaction skills should effect players but it's the players job to interpret how the character reacts to those interaction checks.
The GM does need to respect that some times people (And by comparison characters) can be stubborn or illogical. Even in the face of well arguments. Now that does not mean that the character being difficult is going to be good or productive for the game however. So that should be though out also.

-

 

For my part, I'm still in on the game.
I'm also fine with the point that I have largely put myself in a area where I can't do a lot in the game. (That's fine I get that as a GM, some times cause/effect mean that some players don't have a lot to do)
I'm still very interested in the whole prison part.


We should also remember (Something that's very problematic in pbp) is that some times, the players literally just don't know what they should be doing to move the story along inside the framework of a character.

Some people are also just good as some stuff and not others and it's harder to feel that out in PbP over in person Pen and Paper.

Perfect example, I'm very good at doing the actually talking interaction part of a role playing game in person.
By contrast if you give me a "puzzle" in a pen and paper game... you better hope some one else in the team is good at it, but I'm both not good at it and my brain is going to turn off.

Looking at the whole set up in the prison at first after the 'test' of the security. (Drop kicking someone)
I'll be honest, as a player I look around and think. "Ya this is basically escape proof baring outside interference"
As the GM you have to except some times that, you might have actually stumped your players.
No idea if that is the case here, but input on the discussion.

Great points @DecoyGirl

15 hours ago, cbenny said:

I think that maybe we have different ideas about the timeframe we're working with here. I have several ideas for avenues to try, however most require more information and Herbert isn't going to rush into anything. This is literally day one. Herbert is prepared to spend the next year or so plotting his escape. Getting out within the first month seems like an unrealistic goal.

 

Our characters have no reason to rush. Worst case scenario they just wait ten years and then they're out, free and clear.

"He that can have patience can have what he will." - B. Franklin

14 hours ago, Bananaphone said:

Siren doesn't age so 10 years is nothing to her lol.

 

Hell, she'd emerge with an extra 50 pp in Skills and Advantages and Attributes/Defenses, so why not 🤓.

By then the Insurgency might have built an army of inmates and Guardbots to serve their purposes 😏

7 hours ago, wtaylorjr2001 said:

Dice believes opportunities falls into his lap, the meeting with the inmate proves it. His luck is working. I am enjoying this game, and while sad at the loss of players, I am still here. We are still here. We can easily replace them if desired.

Glad your enjoying it! My hope is that we don't need any replacements. 

4 minutes ago, SageBahamut said:

So... Conaldar and I made peace and now I'm back, if the rest of the group doesn't find my presence too objectionable.

Thanks for returning! @SageBahamut