This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Theories of Player Entitlement

Started by Caesar Slaad, June 15, 2007, 10:31:35 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Caesar Slaad

What is a player entitled to in a game?

What is a player NOT entitled to in a game?

I'm not necessarily suggesting that there is one right answer to these questions. But I am interested in hearing what the different angles are, and the concerns that people have when it comes to examining the role of the player.
The Secret Volcano Base: my intermittently updated RPG blog.

Running: Pathfinder Scarred Lands, Mutants & Masterminds, Masks, Starfinder, Bulldogs!
Playing: Sigh. Nothing.
Planning: Some Cyberpunk thing, system TBD.

Seanchai

Quote from: Caesar SlaadWhat is a player entitled to in a game?

What is a player NOT entitled to in a game?

I'm not necessarily suggesting that there is one right answer to these questions. But I am interested in hearing what the different angles are, and the concerns that people have when it comes to examining the role of the player.

Personally, I feel this is determined by the individual group. Outside the group, I'm sure there are plenty of things which we'd like to be entitled to, but I basically feel this is a social contract thing and that doesn't exist outside said society.

Seanchai
"Thus tens of children were left holding the bag. And it was a bag bereft of both Hellscream and allowance money."

MySpace Profile
Facebook Profile

Mcrow

Players are entitled to play their characters as they see fit and interact with the setting set forth by the GM through their characters.

They are entitled to be "heroes", not just every day people, at least in most games.


Those are big ones for me.

Kyle Aaron

Players' entitlements? Is that like their rights? The power they should have?

Old Uncle Abe once said, Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.

If you're not testing the character, what are you giving the player XP for?
The Viking Hat GM
Conflict, the adventure game of modern warfare
Wastrel Wednesdays, livestream with Dungeondelver

droog

Players are entitled to have fun?
The past lives on in your front room
The poor still weak the rich still rule
History lives in the books at home
The books at home

Gang of Four
[/size]

Kyle Aaron

I dunno, that sounds a bit subversive to me.
The Viking Hat GM
Conflict, the adventure game of modern warfare
Wastrel Wednesdays, livestream with Dungeondelver

jdrakeh

Quote from: Caesar SlaadWhat is a player entitled to in a game?

Fun.

QuoteWhat is a player NOT entitled to in a game?

Fun at the expense of other players. If that's how a player gets their fun, they're really in the wrong hobby.
 

David R

I'm not big on bait & switch kind of GMing. If you as a GM say you're going to run a particular kind of game...you run it. Players are entitled to that much.

Regards,
David R

arminius

James & David--yes.

In a way they're kinda the same thing.

I predict somebody's going to get hung up on whether this means that RPGs can/can't be competitive or involve characters who're at odds with each other.

One of the worst negative examples of what David's talking about was described over at Story Games, IIRC--some idiot GM started out playing a Renaissance/Early Modern Italian type of game using TSoY, then when some sort of climactic magical effect went off, the "players" "woke up" to find they were in a VR game within Shadowrun.

(Note: the SG people weren't endorsing that crap, they were throwing rotten tomatoes at it.)

RPGPundit

The only two things players are absolutely entitled to are these:

1. To have a good time.
2. To walk if they aren't.

In between the first and second entitlement there's all kinds of room for maneuvering, but basically those are the two things Players have a right to, and nothing else.

RPGPundit
LION & DRAGON: Medieval-Authentic OSR Roleplaying is available now! You only THINK you\'ve played \'medieval fantasy\' until you play L&D.


My Blog:  http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/
The most famous uruguayan gaming blog on the planet!

NEW!
Check out my short OSR supplements series; The RPGPundit Presents!


Dark Albion: The Rose War! The OSR fantasy setting of the history that inspired Shakespeare and Martin alike.
Also available in Variant Cover form!
Also, now with the CULTS OF CHAOS cult-generation sourcebook

ARROWS OF INDRA
Arrows of Indra: The Old-School Epic Indian RPG!
NOW AVAILABLE: AoI in print form

LORDS OF OLYMPUS
The new Diceless RPG of multiversal power, adventure and intrigue, now available.

Pierce Inverarity

If you find you need to discuss entitlement of players or GM or both in a really prolonged and fundamental fashion, it means you're fucked. It means sociability hasn't worked at the level at which it needs to be working: the tacit level. For that reason, entitlement discussion will only exarcerbate the problem it's intended to solve. If you throw a party and people start demanding proper entertainment, it's best to call it a day and invite somebody else/go to somebody else's party next time.
Ich habe mir schon sehr lange keine Gedanken mehr über Bleistifte gemacht.--Settembrini

Caesar Slaad

Hey all,

Some of you are being rather more general than I expected.

I often hear things like players having absolute authority over PC actions (this is one I used to have, but I've toyed with some mechanics that close this off a little bit in an effort to make PC behavior more believable) and not killing PCs without player consent.
The Secret Volcano Base: my intermittently updated RPG blog.

Running: Pathfinder Scarred Lands, Mutants & Masterminds, Masks, Starfinder, Bulldogs!
Playing: Sigh. Nothing.
Planning: Some Cyberpunk thing, system TBD.

Pierce Inverarity

Oh.

Well, in that case, as a player I insist on my entitlement to having my PC be killed, at a minimum, for any extreme stupidity as I may commit.

What are those mechanics you're talking about? Homegrown?
Ich habe mir schon sehr lange keine Gedanken mehr über Bleistifte gemacht.--Settembrini

Caesar Slaad

Quote from: Pierce InverarityWhat are those mechanics you're talking about? Homegrown?

Yeah. It always seemed to me that player disinvolvement with the character means they ofter do things that strains credulity. A classical example is a fear-like response, overcoming revulsion.

This has been a while, but what I was toying with was a "commitment" mechanic that gave PCs an allotment of points. They points could be used to:
- gain benefits in line with the character's personality
- avoid compulsory behaviors that might exist in the game.

It's a bit of a compromise, and a carrot vs. stick approach. My hope is that if I give them points that can boost them in other ways, they'll be more reluctant to engage in behaviors that are less believable. But if it's important, they have the option.
The Secret Volcano Base: my intermittently updated RPG blog.

Running: Pathfinder Scarred Lands, Mutants & Masterminds, Masks, Starfinder, Bulldogs!
Playing: Sigh. Nothing.
Planning: Some Cyberpunk thing, system TBD.

jdrakeh

Quote from: Elliot WilenI predict somebody's going to get hung up on whether this means that RPGs can/can't be competitive or involve characters who're at odds with each other.

I suspect that you're right. What people making that argument forget is that games such as football are fun and competitive. And if you're a good sport, winning isn't fun because you're trouncing somebody else, it's just an outcome of playing the game. Competition doesn't have to be about making sure others are miserable. That said. . .

This is how, IME, a wide lot of miserable assholes view competition at the game table. It is this kind of person who I alluded to earlier. If somebody gets their jollies by ruining games for other participants, they're an asocial fuck who need to go back to the basement or learn how to turn their Miserable Asshole knob back down to Well Adjusted Human Being.