Deciding the Effects of a Character's Actions: Methods, Flaws, Strengths, etc.

[Tick]

To be clear, this topic is in reference to when a character attempts to do something - mostly when what they try to do is big/important and affects multiple characters (can be NPCs), or when they try to do something to a character played by someone else - how the RP determines the result. The common way that I've seen, in written RPs, is that either the player leaves the consequences to the person they're acting toward, or the player writes what happens and gets permission from the other. Or, for important events or actions, the player gets permission from the GM.

The main problem I find with this, at least in the former case, is that it's highly dependent on how willing the different players are to be affected - especially when the consequences are negative in some fashion. GMs tend to step in when a player is acting especially bad, by controlling other players' characters too much or refusing to take any loss/effect at all at any time and the like, but it is still often a notable issue. In fact, it might be among those most common in my personal experience.


I'm really curious what other people thought on the general subject: if they had additional or different ways of dealing with this beyond the version I described (e.g. I've seen RPs with rules that kill off characters ignoring overwhelmingly opposing odds to be badass), their bad or good experiences with it, the advantages or disadvantages of the system used, etc. It's a rather important aspect to RPing, due to plot and the necessity of interaction.

[Ellri]

some RPs use die rolls. Not sure how they go about making it fair, but it can probably be used well.

Still, there are many ways to deal with it. Best way is to have it be balanced. Each side affected both taking and giving some hits. Whenever a player isn't being fair about it, the GM should step in. Either by instructing said player to not be as overpowered in behavior, or by forcing it to take some hits. We feel it is only in extreme circumstances that the GM should step in with a kill order.

[Sundered Echo]

So, just to start, I'll say that I have rather little experience with written RP's and so I cant really say much in regards to specifically written RP's.

However, I have been playing in and GMing tabletop RP's for a fair while, and I believe there are ideas that both written and tabletop can take from each other.

So, In my experience of GMing tabletop, I've found that (as I'm sure all but the greenest of RPers know) players tend to do things that are often quite crazy and mess with my plans/plot quite a bit. I generally deal with that by either tailoring situations to avoid the possibility of anything being too crazy, or just some plain old improvisation. Which has sent my plot off in totaly unexpected directions on many occasions...
But obviously, in written RP's the GM isn't forced to react as quickly as in a tabletop, so she has more time to plan a response to mitigate crazy actions.
I think I may be ranting a bit, so onto the more specific player actions affecting specifically other players.
I have, on occasion, had both power gamers and players who will quite happily kill off other players and/or important NPC's, with varying degrees of thought as to what might happen because of their actions. For powergamers, I tend to use things like unexpected situations or enemies that can match their power level to make sure they don't run rough shod over the plot, though still giving the occasional easy encounter so that the power gamer can indulge their ability to work the numbers on occasion. I think for a written RP, I would probably just up the power of the enemies that that player was fighting if said player decided to make himself appear too powerful, thus keeping all power largely relative.
The general thought that I seeas being behind powergaming is that the player wants a really badass character, so, on occasion, you give it to them. However, when it seems to be looking a bit silly, you throw them into an unexpected situation and they often flounder, at least in a tabletop perspective.
As to trigger happy players, I think its sort of a matter of knowing group dynamic. For example, one of the people I regularly play with hates losing characters, and so the rest of the group doesn't try to kill his characters normally, but they have been crippled on occasion. On the other hand, I once had an execution about to happen, and I just sat back and let the players go for it, because I knew that they were both fine with the prospect of that person losing that character. He was kinda important (read: irreplaceable) to the ships crew at the time, but losing him would have made an entirely new challenge for the players, of their own making. Which can sometimes be the best kind of challenge.
Applying that to a written RP, where there isn't always a chance to build up that knowledge of how other players feel about their characters, I would say that really, as long there is communication going on, it should be alright. It might seem slow, but often times if both players are willing to communicate (and include the GM in the loop where required) it will most likely end up with good posts. Using dice or some other chance generator is all very well, as long as everyone understands the system.

Another aspect of this, from a GM's perspective, is that as a GM, I consider my job to be delivering the players an enjoyable experience. In my opinion, one of the first thing a GM should learn is to not get too attached to their own plot, because it will invariably end up not going as originally planned. Thats not to say she should let her players walk over her, so much as to say that she should be prepared to adapt. It is always hard work being a GM, since you never know what the next session (or post, in this case) will bring, so the capacity for quick thinking and a solid knowledge of the game world really help to sort out most problems.
Actually this kinda applies to players as well. Getting too attached to this one really awesome thing that you must do is not a good thing if everyone around you doesn't think its awesome.

Anyway, I think I've turned this into 'Dealing with it when it all goes wrong' so before I go too much more off on a tangent, I'm going to say that Communication is key. As long as players are talking to each other and willing to cooperate, even if it takes a little while, it should result in some awesome reading.

After all, if all we wanted was one really badass character, wouldn't it be easier to just write a book? This medium is about the interaction of players and characters after all.

Hopefully people can find some insight from my ramblings, and apologies for the poorly organised tangential writing....

[KnightShade]

Generally what I will do is either plan in advance with the other player but what I prefer to do is just initiate the action and allow them to react. It's most realistic for one, people don't have the chance to go on more information than given by their senses in real life, so if for example I were to wink to draw my knife to kill a scorpion it gives the other player a chance to missinterpret that action and attack me as well. People sometimes will refuse to accept the consequences of all actions affecting them and if that happens it is the GMs duty to encourage it, but for the most part I wouldn't push it and respect that but at the same time interact more with players who are willing to be affected by events.

[Ellri]

Isn't it the job of the player to thwart the GM?

(within reason of course)


From our understanding, there is indeed much in common between tabletop and play-by-post RPs... Though it may be slightly more common for players to go overboard on going up against the GM in the former. But that might to a large degree be because tabletop players often know each other well, and thus know what they have a chance of getting away with. Forum RPers don't usually know each other that well.

[Doctor Tetris]

I've been wanting to say something about this for a while, but didn't find the words to do so. But I think I got something now.
My belief is that good actions should be rewarded and bad actions should be punished, regardless of what has happened before. At the same time, I do not believe in random chance for deciding the outcome, unless the situation itself makes perfect sense for it to have a random outcome.
If someone is attacking recklessly and the other one is perfectly capable of dodging, then he should be allowed to dodge all the reckless attacks. If at the same time, the defender keeps putting himself on unfavorable positions then the attacker's attack should be effective and not have to worry about a random unlucky missed shot.

Leave the dice rolls to Tabletop RPs and decide the outcome by analysing the characters and the situation they're in.

[Foster]

Let the other person RP impact.

[Rilla]

Personally, I go for more of the what happens after.

If you do this, then this will happen. If you go left, then how will the story be different if you decide to go right.