It’s not hard. It’s unusual but Montsegur 1244, Stalker, Nobilis, and others do it. Like an improv game, the choices might be changed by the structure of the game or guidelines given by stats in the game itself(Nobilis). Stalker has stats and skills and asks the GM to compare their skills to judge
Two white nationalists I exposed in a recent article showed up to try to intimidate me in person last night.
This is a press freedom issue.
Here’s what happened:
Someone sent me a link to where you can buy the Usagi Yojimbo cards by themselves. I’m considering it because I love Usagi but $40 for cards for a game I don’t play….
"But people can judge social situations easier"
Yeah, no. They cannot. People suck at it. We're all much much worse at it than we think. Even behavioral experts aren't as naturally good at it as the common TTRPG argument makes *average gamers* out. It's way harder and more complex than many think.
1. Actual smartest people in the room *suck at it*. See: Nobel disease.
2. Young pros and the highly educated are top targets for scammers. Say, not because they're good judges of lies and social nuance.
3. *waves frantically at all the Dating & Basic Social Skills For Adults cottage industries*
We played a game at a con this summer and, I swear to god, no one could roll about a 6 on a d20 for, like, half the game.
Thankfully, we all found it hilarious but it did mean most of the early fun came from cursing the dice and the gods.
If it was one person, it would just be frustrating.
The blog I put up last week was about why we use systems. Shifting blame is one of the reasons.
"My group likes intra party conflicts, D&D should provide better support for that" is a bad take. Especially in this golden age of TTRPGs.
Expand outwards, find the game that embraces your needs instead of expecting the general audience, mass marketed entry level game to do it for you.
:)
That’s a problem with any randomizer. I was trying something in a Savage Worlds game at Fear the Con and the dice were so much against me that the GM just let it happen. Which—-I was cool with.
{Part of the problem is when failure sucks instead of leading to interesting things)
This is what I love about Smallville. Players go into conflicts looking to lose and both are trying to make sure they load the other up with Stress. All this causes drama, the heart of the game, and gives reasons to have one-on-one scenes to connect and relieve stress.
The loop is beautiful pvp
Structurally D&D punishes intraparty conflict:
- No social/non-violent mechanic to resolve conflict
- Stakes of bad choices can lead to TPK
- Players taught to roleplay their characters desires but not (hard actually) intrapersonal conflict resolution
arguments spiral until impulsive ones act.
The dice can often give an indication to the GM why this person might not be open to the PCs.
I also think the big problem is often that social systems in rpgs aren’t well made. If all combat was one roll that only one or two players were any good at, that would suck, to..
Sometimes it’s because of cognitive bias, or the day they had, or just because you weren’t ever going to convince them.
*waves around him at humanity*. There has never been a time where everyone acted reasonably.
It’s more interesting to be eloquent, passionate and right and still not work
In ttrpgs, I think you should do the RP and then roll to see how well it went.
People seem to think you fail at something because you weren’t eloquent enough.
Sometimes, no matter how good your argument, no matter how impassioned your speech, you’re not gonna reach them
Yeah. I don’t need a player to be persuasive. I do need them to give the reason why it should work.
I also think one of the reasons people don’t like social systems is that they’ve got the “one roll to mind control” systems that do a really bad job of making that interesting, granular, universal, and fair seeming.
I’ve seen people try the same argument over and over with someone, not know how to escalate, and ask for things that absolutely would not fly. (Let a group of strangers with magic in to see the king, for ex.)
It’s why I like rules that make something more than GM Fiat because that’s also a problem
When I get asked for fantasy recommendations, I realize I don’t have all that many.
I should do a genre count.
We have none of the pressures that exist in the real situations when playing. You’re sitting down, comfortable with friends, and don’t have real tension from the situation, environment, physical realities of the PCs…
People think we need combat rules for the same reasons social rules would help
I’m gonna be honest: people are REALLY bad at telling what is persuasive or not.
One look at the internet makes this clear but, when teaching improvisers, we spend a lot of time breaking people of habits that either kill scenes or have them going around and around forver.
1/2
If you're an inexperienced GM don't be afraid to say to your players "I'm not too confident improvising right now so please roughly follow the plot and don't go too far off-piste. Help me to run a good game for you and I'll get more confident and experienced as we all play together"
Then i rolled to randomly determine which shelf/game Here's what I got: Promethean (Frankenstein WoD), Runequest (Bronze age fantasy), Opera House (working in a theatre and defending against ghosts, sabotage, drama, etc. while still being on stage for your parts), and Alien. I'd totally do that
My tiktok mutual, A Stranger Peace, stitched me, so I decided to make one with ideas for the game.
My Idea: Unknown Armies. Nights Black Agents. Tremulus (an interesting, but flawed game), and Underground (some of the Remedy games come close to supers)
Alan Wake 2 gave me a campaign idea: 4 different players. 4 different games. Everyone else plays NPCs in the games of the other players and we rotate through. By the end, we bring all 4 main characters together and, hopefully, have 4 different systems that are important in the final sessions.
Smallville and Dogs in the Vineyard are my gold standard. Masks, Burning Wheel, Technoir, games that handle all conflict the same (The Far Roofs does some cool things)
TTRPG systems, at their core, are frameworks of creative restraints, posing imaginary exercises you wouldn't undertake otherwise.
House-ruling games out the gate avoids the confrontation of expectations & robs you the opportunity of switching frameworks, making you default into a "standard game".
If you're at the airport and Kristi Noem is doing the ominous little message from the TSA screens, you no longer have to do anything she says. Leave your laptop in the case, whatever.
“I would like to play a Thri-Keen because I think playing an insectoid is cool.”= Awesaome. Go with god. Have fun.
“I want to play a Thri-keen because humans aren’t interesting.” = lack of imagination. User error.
Wanting a specific power is not the same thing as making them interesting.
That goes back to the lack of imagination.
