8-bit Play Session

[Balbinus]

He may have percieved that my "teleportation" of Charly's character was with his ability, not as something to clean up Cody's and Avery's PvP conflict.

Just saw this.  Am I right in thinking you intervened in a player versus player confrontation by overriding their actions through the mechanism of an out of game world "teleportation" of someone else's character?

If so, again this is taking power from the players to play as they see fit.  It also sounds like it could cause real suspension of disbelief problems if Charly's character had no such power or no way of knowing the conflict was happening.

[Mike Holmes]

Good points as usual, Max. What I was trying to say was similar, but I think you've been clearer.

Eric, you goofed and a player is complaining. The fact that you can't accept that you messed up is a bad sign. You can't improve if you're not willing to accept your failures and learn from them. You've made no attampt at actually communicating with your player, and instead just attack his opinion (he can play well whether he knows GNS definitions or not). Until your group realizes that all RPGs require co-operation on some level, you're doomed to poor play, IMO.

Mike

[Eric J.]

Uh... I it's been a while.  Let me think back...

Eric J. wrote:
GM: Me

GM: Okay, you relieve yourself of your armor.
Cody: What?!
GM: Hey, it's your biggest burdon.
Cody: Fine. I piss on the gate.

After that a big Wizard comes up and and brings Cody into the air.
Cody and him have a stupid fight and Cody gets flown at Mach "Something or other" into the sky.

 
Well, my logic was that he couldn't "relieve himself" with his armor on + it was funny.  I overstepped my bounds, I'll admit.

GM: Jesse, you think to yourself, "I probably should have told him that they were only dolphins."

Anthony finds this hilarious(Assume that theres a, "(SP?)" after all of my words" and we get into a long involving discussion on what the joke is.

I think that it would be better if Anthony or Avery, or Cody told the rest.

This was because I had limited options in ways of telling the joke and I had to improvise.  The game suffered no penalty.  I know that it indicates a general trend of my controlling tendencies, but I don't really think that it applies to this situation.  I decided that doing that didn't work afterwords, and created a mechanic to fix it.

As for the gooded part.  Yes I goofed.  Anyway- I just asked Anthony if he cares any more and he said no.  This meens that if I deal with this issue again, I will do so at a later date.  Anyway, I didn't meen to attack him because he didn't "understand GNS terms"  I simply wanted a way of putting "Power disbalance shouldn't matter in a game like this" in more technical terms.

However, besides all of that, I'm supprised that this thread is still going.  I have come to the conclusion that the majority of my group is not ready for freeform RPGing, and until we approach the subject again, I will make no further attempt to dispute any points about it.  You can respond if you want, but please don't expect a response from me.

[Balbinus]

Eric,

I fear you may have missed my point.  Cody's behaviour isn't interesting because of whether or not it was a sensible thing to do.  It's interesting because it's a way of him asserting character control when it has been taken away from him.

It feels to me like you're sidestepping the specific points people are making somewhat.  The issue is control and letting go of it, not whether a particular action or example is justified or not.  It's not about whether you or Cody or Avery did a good or bad thing, it's about letting players be protagonists who make their own decisions and who's decisions matter.