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.

PC Choicelessness?

Started by RPGPundit, December 08, 2006, 02:54:48 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

RPGPundit

Like in the "randomness" thread, is there anything in an RPG that you think, or better yet that in your experience has turned out to be, ALWAYS better when determined BY THE DM for a PC?

Alternately, is there something that you think should NEVER be the GM's choice?

Is there something that varies depending on what genre is being played, ie. that you like being GM-determined in a specific genre, but don't in others or just don't care in others?

Is there something you feel the GM should always have veto over? Or Never have veto over?

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.

SunBoy

I'll say that, aside from actual actions, everything could be talked about. I mean, if your party is a little gloomy, maybe you can convince some bloke to pip in with a merry-go-jolly halfling bard, or maybe bribe someone to bring a well-muscled street sammy to your too pansy group of runners. What I am trying to say with these stupid examples is that is too tempting to say "Never let a GM choose personality traits of your character", which is pretty much the only thing I'll find a little difficult to accept as vetable. Everything else, methinks,  can be discussed (as in gentlemanly interchange of opinions). And of course, the GM should always have veto over pretty much anything and everything concerning character's relation with the setting. E.g., you can't have some asshole saying "But my little elfie always thought the Dark Lord a fine chap, even though he killed his whole village and raped his hamster". Of course, all of this is definitely restricted to character creation. Once playing, if someone wants to do something really stupid, and I don't mean "charging at the dragon" stupid, I mean something like "I call Lofwyr and offer to sell him the info I just hacked from Saeder-Krupp" stupid, there's nothing you can do (of course, I mean they really want to, they understand their action but still want to do it, for the fuck of it). You, as GM, get to set the world, and with it you get to mold the people in it, including the PCs. Once they leave your nest, alas, they must fly with their own wings. You have voice (as do the other players, of course, that's freedom of speech), but the final call should be the player's.
Of course, every once in a while you will bump into some dickhead that will keep on doing really incongruent things. Well, in that case, I'll paraphrase the first article I ever read on RPGs: "no one can't take more than a few lightning bolts". Because that's your ultimate right as a GM: the final veto (now tell me that doesn't sound like a name to a WoD thing: "DeadPlayers: The Vetted")
"Real randomness, I\'ve discovered, is the result of two or more role-players interacting"

Erick Wujcik, 2007

droog

And as I answered in the random thread, it depends.
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]