This is kind of spun off from Pundit's GM's Perogative thread. I say kind of, because I'm not so sure, this has any relevence to that discussion. Here goes..

When I first started running games for my current group, this situation came up. This was probably the defining moment of how we as a group of friends, came to an understanding as to how we would function as a group of gamers. But this post has nothing to do with any of this, okay maybe it does..

It was the big showdown of my alt-history-lit, Alienist meets Masque of the Red Death campaign. The vicious Milady de Winter had cornered the group in an underground temple. Her minions were mostly dead, and most of the players were in bad shape...I'm talking about players dragging fellow members away from the scene of carnage. There were 6 of them, and 5 of them were more or less out of the fight.

Two of them were badly wounded, the other two (also badly wounded) were tending to them, caught up in the action of trying to help sibbling and lover. One was delusional courtesy of a spell and the last player had one final shot in his pistol. This character was hiding behing some crates, dejectedly observing the total fuck up before him.

His character was considered the baby of the group. The young police cadet dreaming of righting wrongs so unlike his fellow officers. Most of the players had totally forgotten about his character being in a situation most dire. The BigBad approaches two of the characters - one cradling the head of the other and raises her pistol. This is the end...

BUT..just at that moment when she is delievering her big bad speech, the hidden player gets up from where he is hiding,stumbles in the process but manages to shoot, his last shot...he hits...(and rolls for damage)

The damage was pretty decent but nothing critical. I had two options. The first , disregard the actual HP/health level of the opponent and consider the shot a fatal one thus ending the game or the second, think of it as any other shot and allow the fight to continue (even though I knew that it would end (for various reasons) with the party being destroyed)

My question is this. At what point between these two options (if there is even a clear demarcation) do I stop playing an rpg and start playing a story game?

Regards,
David R

The line is "knowing your players, what would be the most fun for them?"

If you change the shot into a fatal hit, you're definitely in storytelling game mode...not necessarily story-game, as the people who sort of "own" that term are themselves pretty anti-fudging.

Also IMO if you choose that option, the players will stop caring about the rules, and they might also stop caring about their own player-characters' actions. The game can survive the former (and may be the first step toward a socially-mediated sort of story-game) but I think the latter would be fatal.

If you let the PCs die, you're still in "adventure RPG" mode, but you'll be taking a short-term hit in hopes of long-term profit. That is, people will be unhappy, but the rules will retain their integrity as a process through which the players can make stuff happen.

You might be able to choose a middle ground by saying that getting hit by the bullet causes the enemy to change her plans, capture the PCs, and execute them Dr. Evil style, out of spite. It's not much different from option one but it does allow you to acknowledge the player's use of the rules to achieve partial success by giving him a significant impact on the outcome, yet not giving the party all the cookies.

I think the lead-up to the scene might be worth considering. That is, there might be elements of your GMing style, or the mindset of the group, which made this crisis inevitable. In other words, you might already have been storytelling/gaming, but the rules hadn't gotten in the way of it until that point.

Let 'em go. Alternatively, change the Big Bad's behavior because of the shot. If he's not the type to stand around in a firefight have him hightail it. If he is, have him turn to go after the attack, giving the downed pair a chance to grab a nearby  chunk of debris and drop him. Or perhaps he's shooting rubber bullets and captures the group.

Basically, if you never want to have a TPK, either tell the players ahead of time and fudge away (least favorable option), give the players control of it ahead of time with fate points or something similar (better), set up the campaign such that life and death aren't the big risk factors (good), or never put the players in deadly situations (horrid unless agreed on in advance).

It also really depends on the game system. If the shot can't possibly kill the big bad without being a crit, and he drops over dead, you'll tell a better story but lose a bit of respect. At least, you would in my group.

I would have ruled it a kind of snipe. The Big Bad didn't know the character was there, it was a total surprise, and the PC had the drop.

-clash

If the story wasn't meant to be a tragedy, I would have killed the Big Bad.

Had it been my game, the hit would have been a hit, for the damage it did and that's all.
The other players might have acted then, something else you didn't expect might have happened, or a few of them might have gotten away, or they all might die.

This (what you proposed) is definitely not the kind of fudging I would find acceptable. But then, your mileage may vary.

RPGPundit

What I'm trying to get at is that IME most games have these kinds of fudgings -okay maybe not as extreme in my OP - but my question is when does one draw the line between an rpg and a storygame.

Because really, stuff like this happens all the time in games, and GMs just make a call, based on what the players will like off course, but they don't consider themselves playing a "storygame" or whatever the terminology is.

Regards,
David R

I think if you're going to switch over to cinematic cut-scene mode, you need to do it before the player rolls the dice.  Don't ask players to make choices or leave things to chance unless you're prepared to go along with whatever comes up.

For climactic scenes in the game, it might be interesting to switch from just "chance" to an "interesting choice" for the player.

GM:  "You can either make your regular to hit roll... or... you could rush the villain and take that shot from close range.  In that case, we'll say it's a fatal shot... for both characters."

Or whatever makes it a VERY interesting decision, as opposed to a regular decision like you've seen throughout the game.

(I'm thinking "out loud" with this idea.  I'm not 100% sure about it... any comments on whether this is a good approach, or is it still breaking the rules of the game too much?)

Eh.  I don't give a shit about stupid false dichotomies.  What I give a shit about is what would've made a cool, fun experience.

In my head I see the somewhat scared, out of his league cop finally overcoming himself, standing up, and shooting the villain clean in the back, with a line about not taking it anymore, or telling the villain to stay the hell away from his friends, or something.

At that point, maybe as a GM I'd respond by the villain getting a shocked look on her face, clutching her stomach, and whirling around.  Maybe she'd stagger a bit.  Now she's got a hole in her.  People don't like having holes in them.  Maybe she dies right there, rules or no (it was a surprise round anyway).  Maybe she's wounded, and she staggers off, unaware that the cop has no rounds left but not wanting to take the risk.  

Whatever happens, it should be fun.  Silly labels don't enter into it.

I roughly skimmed the other people's responses--but here's one I'd consider:

Have the wounded big-bad retreat after being hit well. The BB doesn't know everyone's respective health-levels. I think that taking unexpected fire might produce a legitimate fear reaction and have the BB pull back.

Playing the NPCs the way you want to is one of the things in the GM's sphere of control pretty much no matter what. You can have them be stupid (or, if you must, make a few modfier-moderated rolls for courage), act on imperfect information, be surprised, etc.

Maybe the BB is so incensed about being sniped they turn and stalk across the floor to the hidden character giving the PC who was being attacked time to get a shot in the back?

Something like that. Not fudging a dice-roll, but working within the established context to produce an outcome that you, as the person in charge of those elements, find the most pleasing.

-Marco

Quote from: David RWhat I'm trying to get at is that IME most games have these kinds of fudgings -okay maybe not as extreme in my OP - but my question is when does one draw the line between an rpg and a storygame.

Because really, stuff like this happens all the time in games, and GMs just make a call, based on what the players will like off course, but they don't consider themselves playing a "storygame" or whatever the terminology is.

Regards,
David R

It doesn't matter what you call it. I normally avoid blanket statements, but I am beginning to think that the true "swine" are everyone who thinks that such things do matter.

Another note: many systems give rules like the following--

1. Ways to make sneak attacks more damaging (aim? attack from surprise? called shots?).
2. Ways to have the players take actions that give them powerful edges (StarCluster's perfect-zero rule).
3. Extra bonuses for "coolness."

If the system you are playing has none of these then, yeah, you are facing a situation where you are balancing the game on one dice roll at this point. But there are a lot of gradations of mechanical facilitation to events like this before you get to things like roll for narration rights.

I'm not a big fan of the "if you fudge a roll you're playing the wrong system" argument since external events can change dramatically that can impact what system-choices would be (player has death in the family, comes for escapist game in a continuing campaign, you don't say no--but the dice do something tragic ... I'd be hard pressed to condemn either the GM or the system for a dice-fudge there).

But I also think that in games where the PCs are very meaningful to the Players things that mitigate PC-death rate are good and degrees of success and failure are good.

-Marco

QuoteHave the wounded big-bad retreat after being hit well. The BB doesn't know everyone's respective health-levels. I think that taking unexpected fire might produce a legitimate fear reaction and have the BB pull back.

Beat you to it by 1 minute.    But yeah, I think I like that answer the best, because it gives a cool scene.  Victory snatched from the jaws of defeat, but the villain still escaped to harry the PCs another day.  

Recurring villains always rock.

Quote from: J ArcaneBeat you to it by 1 minute.  

Beat you to it by two hours and two minutes.