Two things occur to me about this example of the way the game went. 1) The pcs said 'We KNEW there was going to be a Charmer'. 2) That the person involved said she felt a little frustrated that the players didn't fall in line with what she considered obvious clues as to the way the game would be played. In reference to point 1), I'm wondering if mind control (or whatever you like to call something that externally the behaviour of a player's character) may be an overused motif in the game. In reference to point 2), however, the DM has no need to become frustrated, because the situation that the DM offers is up to the players to interpret and offer interesting new insights. As an ideal, anyway. It seems to me that the thing that the DM DOESN'T ever really need to do is define the behaviour of the pcs. That, after all, is in the province of the player. If a player isn't playing the game, but simply going through the motions, then the situation has failed to capture their imagination, and take them into a new role playing environment. By and large, players (at least in my experience) are very keen to attempt something new and untested, to find out how the world works, and to find a new direction to move in. That direction can be something that the DM offers them with something new, like the situation where the players must find a way around the obstacle that confronts them. If, on the other hand, the obstacle is insuperable, then you haven't created something that they can interact with, really. You've merely INSTRUCTED them in the direction that they MUST take. Making the players roll dice at the beginning of the game doesn't really mean anything, either. Role playing games are not about 'transparency of administration'. They're about sharing a fantasy of one sort or another. If you're going to use dice, then I would suggest that they be used to do the thing that they were designed to do, to wit, raise tension. If you want players to behave in a particular fashion, then you must actually manipulate the situation so that they feel that the new direction is one that is in line with the natural flow of the game, from the point of view of their character. Not from the point of view of the DM. That deus ex machina should be reserved for especially difficult situations. The White Crow wrote: > At 06:17 PM 12/22/2000, you wrote: > >I find that the best way to work out "scrutinize vs his charm" situations is > >to let the characters describe what they do, say, think, etc. If they say > >something that makes sense, like, "I notice that Bob's been acting funny > >when he's around [NPC with supercharm], so I'm going to try to concentrate > >on carrots when I talk to him", I'll give them some kind of bonus to their > >die roll. > > > >It works pretty well, and it rewards the PC's who's players are observant. > > I'm not sure that will work well with my players. It wasn't quite > applicable to the situation--although, looking back on it, it could have > been if they'd gone about it differently. > > For those that might care, here's how the situation played itself out in > the finale of the Brave New World short campaign: > > I made them all roll the dice without telling them what it was for, at the > very beginning of the session. I then looked at their sheets to figure out > the appropriate skill level and dutifully wrote it all down. > > They went through the massive firefight with the henchmen, and then the bad > guy comes out at the end and peacefully surrenders, speaking calmly and > sounding reasonable. I tried every non-in-your-face technique I could > think of to get across to them that it was a calm and reasonable > situation. I described him, the impressions he gave off, the way he was > speaking (even attempting to get it across in my own mannerisms, like a > good little GM), and what not. > > They refused to come down off their "Grr, ug, we the PC good guys, you > should be afraid of us!" attitude. "Tell us why you are doing > this!" (Look menacingly at lethal arrow knocked in bow). He calmly gives > his answer, and repeats "Either you must kill me or arrest me. Which is it > going to be?" > > So I started getting a little more insistent. "Look, he seems so darn > reasonable. You feel a little silly threatening him." > > Then they started saying "We knew there was going to be a Charmer! I get a > roll!" I smiled and held up my little sheet with numbers on it. "You > didn't make it." The one guy who'd rolled phenomenally started to squawk, > but I pointed out to him that he'd been wounded pretty good and was > currently being bandaged and not truly paying attention. He didn't argue > with that. Being shot at close range makes even a PC a little out of > it. They turned him over to the authorities. > > In the end, I'm not sure I'm happy with how it went, even as I'm not sure > how I could have done it differently. Making the roll at the beginning was > a good idea, and only one of them came (even with bonuses from knowing the > possibility might be there) even close to getting what he would have needed > -- and he was injured at the time and under medical care. But even > still...I guess it was irritating that they didn't take any clues from what > I was saying and only when I waved the Rules and the Dice Rolls at them did > they fall in line with what I was trying to get across as the PC > perception. It was frustrating. > > Jennifer > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > GMAST Home Page: http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- GMAST Home Page: http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/
