Quote from: jeff37923;805319I prefer PvP at the table so that Players can police their own. You know that one annoying as shit guy who keeps fucking with everyone's fun during the game while claiming he's "just role-playing his character"? Yeah, fuck him and his character, let another Player Character just off him.

Whereas I don't play with assholes.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;805297There seems to be this general notion going around that PvP in RPGs is inherently bad, whether in and of itself or as specifically applied to rolling dice to headshot a muthafucker -- muthafucker being that degenerative-asshole-across-the-table-from-you's character.

I don't understand this.

I condone and even encourage this shit all the time in any and all games I host. Puts players on edge and makes em' think twice, ramps up intensity and emotional/economical buy-in value and autocorrects asshole/escapist behaviour at the table: this being my experience, of course. Run several different systems in my modest time as a GM and none of them seem to change how the above plays out -- death is a legit outcome in all cases. Much fun had by all every time which I'm very thankful for.

So what's the deal?

My, aren't WE fierce.

Quote from: Old Geezer;805536Whereas I don't play with assholes.

So, you've never played at a convention or a hobby shop or a friend's house where you never had met the other Players before and didn't know if one of them was an asshole or not? My God, you have astounding luck for a man who is considered a Venerable Sage of Gaming in his own mind.

Quote from: Sommerjon;805519I don't agree with this.

It's too easy to get away with PCicide.

That subtlety and complexity is too hard to replicate playing make believe with dice.

Weird ...

You don't agree that the base element of RPG is  ...  players take on the roles of people in the environment and these people have their own goals, aims and foibles.

ie we are tryign to play believable characters in a shared imagined world

I agree that if you are down in a dark tunnel it is very easy to get away with killing someone and get away with it. Probably why dungeon adventuring attracts so many murder hobos

You don't need to use dice diplomacy and Amber don't use dice after all

But really you must be dealing with quite immature players if you think allowing them to play independent realistic characters is too much of a risk because they will always opt to play characters that will kill each other and its too hard to police that in game so ...

When I roleplay I roleplay. I have roleplayed a lot of self serving quasi-sociopathic folk, but I have played a lot of idealistic selfless altruistic folk, I tend to play people that are a a bit of a mix of both, want to do good but a bit cowardly, want to be carefree and not tied down by "social mores' but at the same time had a shred of decency that won't allow them to see their brothers in arms left behind. You know conflicted types that try to mirror real people.
This isn't very hard to achieve with make believe with or without dice I mean we have been doing it since we were about 14 or 15 and I am sure that most of the people on the site would say the same thing.

In real life I could easily see a stranger follow them home kill them and take all their stuff and the chance of me being caught are miniscule (more likely in the UK due to CCTV) but I don't, not because I fear being caught but because I am not a crazy psychopath....

Quote from: Bren;805506Aggression seems to be your shtick. Which makes a lot of what you are saying sound like you are attacking someone. If you don't want to give that impression, a less confrontational and jargon laden approach would really help.

I'm aware that gaming with friends is different than gaming with chance met acquaintances. I've done both. Overall, I prefer gaming with people I know well. It allows a depth to the experience that isn't available in the club gaming scene. But the same methods for dealing with assholes work with people who are mere acquaintances. Tell them what behaviors are unacceptable. If they comply great. If not, tell 'em not to let the door hit them in the ass on their way out.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here. No idea whatsoever.

In my experience, assholes are always fairly obvious and easy to detect. Apparently that ability is not universal since I am sometimes surprised when other people seem to take what seems eons to notice that shit.

You sound cold,  removed and slightly dry in the way you write and sometimes say stuff that sounds mad rude, although all you're trying to do is be precise. It's not a shtick, it's just how you talk. And that's fine.

Vampire should have been shot first immediately. "Backstabber" be killed off immediately. One out of "it's boring", the other "sin" . Same basic thing, different motivator.

Quote from: Phillip;805507What's easy logistically depends on priorities that may not be the same as yours or mine: The final verdict comes from players whose enjoyment of the game (or lack thereof) is what it is regardless of any theory of what it "ought to be."

Also, splitting the party was just one example of many potential difficulties.

Nah, I believe there are basic skills that all GMs should have under their belt. Scalable table management is one, though it's certainly not.basic training. There are levels to this thing. And one should aspire to be the best in whatever it is they do. Set standards.

Seriously, party splitting, not something to worry about.

Quote from: estar;805511A civil war in the setting, turned into a civil war among the player characters. It was the damnest thing too.

This particular incident started when the PCs returned to the City-State of the Invincible Overlord from a dungeon adventure. While they were shopping and spending their gold, they heard the bells ringing at the Cathedral that signaled an important the announcement.

The PCs joined the crowd, and out comes the priest, who announced the high priest was dead. He was elderly so this was expected at some point. What was unexpected was that immediately afterward the priest announced that the Invincible Overlord was a enemy of the church. That all the faithful to rise and overthrow him. That they should support the nobles who also risen up against the Overlord.

Then immediately people started fighting each other in the cathedral square. The city guard allied with the temple guard and then started fighting the Overlord's troops. Then bells starting ringing a call to arms from a rival temple.

The PCs initial reaction was of stunned confusion. When they saw people being hacked down, they rushed in and started to separate the combatants and calm things down. And they were making some headway. Until one of the Rogue PCs who was nominally a Overlord loyalist, politics wasn't big with this group, went after the priests instigating the riots.

This drew the attention of the paladin of the party and the cleric who were followers of the same deity as the temple. The Rogue wouldn't back off and attack the Paladin standing between him and the priest. Granted the Rogue wasn't attacking to kill but to get the Paladin out of the way. But the Paladin PC finally had it and the two started to hack into each other.

Meanwhile the Priest PCs was trying to rally temple guards and city guards and get them to retreat to the temple.  But finally lost it after a group of opportunists (NPCs) fighting with the Overlord's forces got in the way of the retreat. After this he was full out fighting on the temple's side.

Which brought him into conflict another PC who was a Knight of the Overlord. The knight decided to run his group down and the two of them went at it.

Of the remaining two PCs, a dwarven wizard and a human female Rogue. The Dwarven Wizards popped an Invisibility Ring and hunkered down. The Female Rogue rode a Broom of Flying doing nothing but healing party members with potions and magic items if they went down regardless of which side they were fighting on. She also stopped a rape, and several assaults in nearby alleys.

What caused all this is a result of one of the ways I run my campaigns. I have a timeline of events that I keep updating in light of what the PCs do and not do. One of the things that been going on is a civil war involving the Invincible Overlord. The war is in its early stage and until confined to the periphery territories of the Overlord.

In any campaign what I primarily focus on depends on the interests of the players. But whatever they are doing it part of the larger world of my Majestic Wilderlands. Throughout the campaign they avoided politics. Which is fine. Instead they focused on scrounging up rumors, lore and finding all the ruins and dungeons in the area of City-State.  Including megadungeons like Tegal Manor and the Majestic Wilderlands.

Along the way, they had some effect, and made some contacts, but nothing that would alter the fact that on this particular day in the campaign, the High Priest would die, that his underling, now in control, would throw in their support in with those rebelling against the Overlord to try to take control of City-State.

Now the party is split and one group of PC attacked the other. I am prepared to run separate session if need be. But I suspect they will find a way to get back together. A lot of their dungeon exploration is outside of City-State territory and there are things that the group is dealing with that are actually more important in their mind than the fact that City-State has gone up in flames. I am sure they will surprise me next session.

This sounds awesome! Well done my man!

Quote from: Natty Bodak;805518All ears, and it looks like it's starting break through to you. You're coming to realize that your world / local ecology might not hold all the fish in the sea. Depending on how sefl-aware you are you may embrace this, or you might defensively tell yourself you knew that all along.

Either way, condescension can be quite the proper attitude and tool in order to work out the hierarchy so we can further educate you as needed.  One day when you grow out of the teen poseur nwod stuff you might be prepared for something a bit more satisfying.  I hope the process treats you well, and that your ub3r l337 supernatural strike commando anti-asshole assassins follow in your footstips and develop a mature sense of how all this does work in the real world.

Prost!

Hah hah, he doesn't stop, does he?

Why do I get the feeling you're one of those window-dressing ponces with a copy of the God Delusion in their hands in Starbucks who dresses in couduroy who tries to talk like they're an intellectual but are really just arrogant snobs who spit out names like Kant and Engels like they've just got their philosopher of the month club mag in the mail.

On your bike, son...

Quote from: Old Geezer;805537My, aren't WE fierce.

Darling, I'm fabulous!

Quote from: jeff37923;805539So, you've never played at a convention or a hobby shop or a friend's house where you never had met the other Players before and didn't know if one of them was an asshole or not? My God, you have astounding luck for a man who is considered a Venerable Sage of Gaming in his own mind.

I know, right? Why are these guys speaking like they're some wizened old guard who've ascended to a higher plane of thinking or something?

Quote from: Sommerjon;805516Nah, you sound 15.

Not the worst thing in the world, all things considered.

You're new? What's your take on the subject?

Fascinating thread. For some historical perspective, may I suggest Gary Fine's "Shared Fantasy" (University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-24943-3), chapter four, page 145 for how this issue played out in Prof. Barker's campaign?

Quote from: jeff37923;805539So, you've never played at a convention or a hobby shop or a friend's house where you never had met the other Players before and didn't know if one of them was an asshole or not? My God, you have astounding luck for a man who is considered a Venerable Sage of Gaming in his own mind.

I won't speak to the Glorious General's experience - I doubt I'm qualified to do so! - but speaking for myself, I have indeed had astounding luck in not having had to game with assholes. I've played at a few conventions and hobby shops over the years, as well as at a few friend's houses, I can think of only two or three real assholes that I've met in that time; I didn't play with the one, after I caught him pocketing some of my miniatures, and I simply refused to game with the two who routinely cheated on dice rolls.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;805555I won't speak to the Glorious General's experience - I doubt I'm qualified to do so! - but speaking for myself, I have indeed had astounding luck in not having had to game with assholes. I've played at a few conventions and hobby shops over the years, as well as at a few friend's houses, I can think of only two or three real assholes that I've met in that time; I didn't play with the one, after I caught him pocketing some of my miniatures, and I simply refused to game with the two who routinely cheated on dice rolls.

Granted, the jerks are few and far between, but they do still exist and PvP usually solves them when they are found.

Quote from: Ravenswing;805528My overwhelming experience with PvP, both in gaming circles with which I've been familiar and the comments of others, is that for every upfront face-to-face PC vs PC duel, there are fifty backstabs or other acts of theft or treachery.  The notion, as many a defender of the practice has stated to me, that this is just healthy conflict, is bullshit.  Most practitioners aren't after "healthy conflict," they're after the sure thing.

Your experience is utterly unlike anything I have ever seen anywhere in 40+ years of regular gaming in half a dozen states and two countries.

Quote from: Ravenswing;805528And folks?  How about we don't get hung up any more on the term "backstabbing" than we're being asshole pedants who smarmily say "But it can't REALLY be 'PvP' unless the players themselves are having fistfights!"

You use the term "sin" unironically in the context of playing an RPG and pendantry is the thing you think is the problem in this discussion. Seriously?

Quote from: Sommerjon;805522You really think it will?

Not really, of course. Just trying some diagnostics to figure this guy's pathology out. Right now I have to with a juggalo from the Steven Seagal school of RPGs. I had no idea there were juggalos in London, but there you go.

Quote from: jibbajibba;805544Weird ...

You don't agree that the base element of RPG is  ...  players take on the roles of people in the environment and these people have their own goals, aims and foibles.

No I don't agree with players take on the roles of people in the environment and these people have their own goals, aims and foibles. full stop.

Quote from: jibbajibba;805544ie we are trying to play believable characters in a shared imagined world

I love that you use trying.

Quote from: jibbajibba;805544I agree that if you are down in a dark tunnel it is very easy to get away with killing someone and get away with it. Probably why dungeon adventuring attracts so many murder hobos

You don't need to use dice diplomacy and Amber don't use dice after all

Getting away with murdering someone in a RPG is child's play.  RPGs rely upon a random factor most usually dice. Bringing up Amber?  Really?

Quote from: jibbajibba;805544But really you must be dealing with quite immature players if you think allowing them to play independent realistic characters is too much of a risk because they will always opt to play characters that will kill each other and its too hard to police that in game so ...

No I game with people who aren't their characters 24/7/365.  What happens at the table is a caricature of a self serving quasi-sociopathic or idealistic selfless altruistic.

I see RPGs as a mix of game and collaborative fiction. And the fiction I'm interested in is where the players are heroes of some kind.

Players are authors, too, so there are certain meta rules I enjoy to guide characterization.

If you fuck with things 'because that's my character,' hey, you wrote the character. You can rewrite it. It isn't holy writ.

Disagreements, sure, but actual pvp? No thanks.

I am fine with player versus player, and with conflict occurring within the party (in fact I'd say I prefer it), but if you are forcing that on a group that has no interest, you are being a dick and that is what gives the style of play a bad name. This boils down to being able to read the room and know what people at the table consider acceptable gaming behavior. There is a reason "it's what my character would do" is synonymous with being a jerk. Some folks simply don't seem to know when they are antagonizing the rest of the group. It is a spectrum. Some folks are cool with a bit of internal conflict, some are fine with outright violent confrontation, some want a purely competitive style of play, and others want the party to basically get a long. You really need to know what kind of group you are in before you go stabbing a PC in the middle of the night.

RPGs are poor tools for collaborative fiction. There are better ways of doing collaborative fiction that doesn't require the hassle and setup of a tabletop RPG.

Quote from: estar;805583RPGs are poor tools for collaborative fiction. There are better ways of doing collaborative fiction that doesn't require the hassle and setup of a tabletop RPG.

Maybe you haven't been doing it right.