GM vs Player narrative authority

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

There used to be GURPS supplement that worked out mechanically what the affects of drinking. I wish I still had my GURPS books. It would be interesting to convert that to Hero.

 

If it exists, there's a GURPS sourcebook for it, and that sourcebook probably has a section that requires square roots.

 

Virtually, Bodkins Odds

 

PS. And that square root section is addictively fun. I could use the GURPS mech creation rules all day. Will I ever use those mechs in an actual game? Probably not. Will I stop making them? Again, probably not.

[Mister E]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

How about Luck 3D6 only when drinking?

 

I like this. I believe that we make our own luck.

 

According to Aristotle, what we do when we are drunk is not our fault. Getting drunk in the first place is.

 

So... [to my mind] if you hit on women when you are drunk... you shouldn't drink around women... unless you want to hit on them... when you are sober.

[ghost-angel]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

Good grief. 17+ pages on this at rpg.net. 7 pages here.

 

The answer seems obvious to me: refer to your social contract. If the group has agreed that GM interpretation carries stronger weight than player interpretation in this particular game, then the GM is in the right. If not, I'd give then benefit if the doubt to the player.

 

If you game without discussing the social contract, this is the kind of mess you get yourself into (long-established groups tend to develop their own social contracts over the years, even without explicit discussion).

 

I believe the thread title is all we need to know about the 'social' contract: GM versus Player.

 

Which is, in all seriousness, the actual source of the problem (and how many posters on RPG.Net game).

[Zen Archer]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

That's a superpower and not normal.

 

(guessing at the costs - at work without rulebooks)

5 Life Support: Immunity to Alcohol (might be optional)

5 Lightning Reflexes +10 - Only While Intoxicated, Progressive with Level Of Intoxication(-1/2)

 

Fever was clearly drunk, so I'd go with the second but not the first. He might have some kind of tolerance, though.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

I believe the thread title is all we need to know about the 'social' contract: GM versus Player.

 

Which is, in all seriousness, the actual source of the problem (and how many posters on RPG.Net game).

 

I seriously did not want to wade back into this mess, but...

 

That's not how it looks to me. If this was a "player contradicts GM" thing it wouldn't be worth commenting on.

 

As described, it's a "player contradicts himself" thing, and that's when the trouble started.

 

Should the GM just ignore player comments if they go out of their way to describe an action that merits a slightly higher penalty?

 

Okay, some people on this thread have said, Yes he should. Their input is noted.

 

Now, by that exact same logic....

 

Should the GM just ignore player comments if they go out of their way to describe an action that merits a slightly higher bonus?

 

 

Let the hypocrisy begin....

[Laundry Knight]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

I seriously did not want to wade back into this mess, but...

 

That's not how it looks to me. If this was a "player contradicts GM" thing it wouldn't be worth commenting on.

 

As described, it's a "player contradicts himself" thing, and that's when the trouble started.

 

Should the GM just ignore player comments if they go out of their way to describe an action that merits a slightly higher penalty?

 

Okay, some people on this thread have said, Yes he should. Their input is noted.

 

Now, by that exact same logic....

 

Should the GM just ignore player comments if they go out of their way to describe an action that merits a slightly higher bonus?

 

 

Let the hypocrisy begin....

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I would allow character choices to allow either a reduced penalty or even a bonus. If Epically Drunk Dude were Only Slightly Buzzed Dude, I would likely reduce the penalty reduce the penalty to -1. Also, if he was only pretending to be drunk when insulting the mean hombre, I would consider giving him a surprise bonus until the Mean Hombre wised up to the fact that Epically Drunk Dude was only playin' possum.

[ghost-angel]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

No I mean on a larger scale - the argument comes up because there's still a heavy underlying current in gaming that it's GM vs Player - ergo the player will assume (regardless of actual reasoning) the GM is just trying to "get him" and most often uses the book as an excuse.

 

My feelings are well documented in the thread, I'm pretty much agree with the GM, and the fault I find with the player is the start of their defense 'but the book says' ... This is not what I'm talking about.

 

I'm talking about WHY the argument started.

[Laundry Knight]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

I guess we are missing the context and the history. Does the GM have a history of nerfing the players at every opportunity, or is the player a consummate munchkin and rules lawyers looking for every loophole he can? Is there some kind of personal feud between player and GM that boils into the game?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

Agreed - the facts we are given are not sufficient to assess where, if anywhere, any real problem lies.

[Sean Waters]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

Perhaps the characters are real and the players are their ethereal souls, nudging them in one direction or another, but powerless to command, buffetted by the eternal seas of chance.

 

That would probably make the GM God, which suits me.

 

What were we talking about again? Note to self: keep internal monologue internal...

[Pegasus40218]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

I'm relatively new to the system, but I tend to side with the GM on this one. Also, some information is missing from the discussion. For example, what are the character's OCV and DCV with skill levels? The increased penalty from -2 to -3 could be a net loss in effectiveness of less than 0.5% if the PC is at either end of the scale. At worst, it's a drop of about 12.5% in the odds of success...again, not all that stiff.

 

As for those questioning how important it is to the campaign, I'd say it depends on the campaign. If you're running a fairly realistic game, and the character kills or seriously injures somebody, particularly somebody with influential connections, well -- you've got another story line to pursue in your game. Somebody just picked up a "hunted" or a "rival"! It would also depend on the tone and morality you want in your game. If you're running a game where actions have consequences, and you want to discourage the PCs from behaving stupidly just because they're tougher than everybody else...well, then getting into drunken brawls - especially on a regular basis - should have some sort of in-game consequences (negative reputation would seem appropriate).

[bigbywolfe]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

Well said. Repped.

 

I'm relatively new to the system, but I tend to side with the GM on this one. Also, some information is missing from the discussion. For example, what are the character's OCV and DCV with skill levels? The increased penalty from -2 to -3 could be a net loss in effectiveness of less than 0.5% if the PC is at either end of the scale. At worst, it's a drop of about 12.5% in the odds of success...again, not all that stiff.

 

As for those questioning how important it is to the campaign, I'd say it depends on the campaign. If you're running a fairly realistic game, and the character kills or seriously injures somebody, particularly somebody with influential connections, well -- you've got another story line to pursue in your game. Somebody just picked up a "hunted" or a "rival"! It would also depend on the tone and morality you want in your game. If you're running a game where actions have consequences, and you want to discourage the PCs from behaving stupidly just because they're tougher than everybody else...well, then getting into drunken brawls - especially on a regular basis - should have some sort of in-game consequences (negative reputation would seem appropriate).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

As for those questioning how important it is to the campaign' date=' I'd say it depends on the campaign. If you're running a fairly realistic game, and the character kills or seriously injures somebody, particularly somebody with influential connections, well -- you've got another story line to pursue in your game. Somebody just picked up a "hunted" or a "rival"! It would also depend on the tone and morality you want in your game. If you're running a game where actions have consequences, and you want to discourage the PCs from behaving stupidly just because they're tougher than everybody else...well, then getting into drunken brawls - especially on a regular basis - should have some sort of in-game consequences (negative reputation would seem appropriate).[/quote']

 

While trues, I think that goes beyond the issue of an extra penalty to the issue of going out to get into a bar fight in the first place. Getting upset and going out to beat up random bar patrons certainly could have material impact on the campaign. Whether the penalty he fights those random individuals under is -2 or -3 doesn't seem nearly as important.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: GM vs Player narrative authority

 

I know what the book says. I'm telling you what I would do.

 

This sums it up. The GM runs the game, not the book. Unless the GM is totally out of bounds, the player should roll with it, and discuss the issue in non-game time if they'd like a change to future rulings. In the example on the other forum, a -3 for someone who wishes to be epically drunk doesn't seem abusive at all.