On Arguments of Event Play Out

[Ewe]

Arguments of event play out are intrinsically embedded into the nature of human interaction surrounding Role Play. If I were to elaborate with a more concrete example:

Suppose a gnome player were to emote the act of pushing a Half-Orc player.

How do the arguments of event play out resolve themselves?

There's several possibilities, but here are a few of the simplest scenarios:

1.) Organic Emote Flow: The Half-Orc player can simply submit to the gnome's emote and produce a text that would subsequently coincide with the previous action thus to resolve total play out. E.g.: gnome emotes *pushes Half-Orc down* and the Half-Orc emotes *falls over*

2.) Inorganic Emote Flow: The Half-Orc player could provide an emote that contradicts the gnome's to reaffirm their decision in play out though to create discontinuation in the play out context. E.g.: gnome emotes *pushes Half-Orc down* and the Half-Orc emotes *Doesn’t get pushed*


3.) Player Dice Consent: The Half-Orc player insists upon a dice roll check of str to determine the play out.


Now, depending on the personality of the player and their character’s image event play out may create conflict: an OOC dispute about whether or not these actions could have happened, will happen, or should have happened. The Half-Orc player may OOCly dispute that they could never be pushed down by a small creature, then the gnome player may dispute "well this character isn’t like an ordinary gnome it’s in his RP." (I know this gnome/half-orc example is kind of silly, but disputes regarding play out are very real things! )


What does all this amount to? Simply arguments.

No one has fun when this happens.


Here’s a few suggestions I can offer to try and avoid this kind of conflict:

Rather than emote *pushes over player*,

Try: *attempts to push over player*

This way you are allowing the choice to be given to the other player rather than forcing an action of eventual play out upon them.


Another suggestion is to simply consider those around you. We are playing a game with other people and they have thoughts and feelings, too. Respect each other.


Lastly, don’t forget to have fun. Take a chance a few times and go with the flow rather than trying to be a stick in the mud and argue about every action of play out.

[Steve]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm

Bull Rush

You can make a bull rush as a standard action (an attack) or as part of a charge. When you make a bull rush, you attempt to push an opponent straight back instead of damaging him. You can only bull rush an opponent who is one size category larger than you, the same size, or smaller.
Initiating a Bull Rush

First, you move into the defender’s space. Doing this provokes an attack of opportunity from each opponent that threatens you, including the defender. (If you have the Improved Bull Rush feat, you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender.) Any attack of opportunity made by anyone other than the defender against you during a bull rush has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting the defender instead, and any attack of opportunity by anyone other than you against the defender likewise has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting you. (When someone makes an attack of opportunity, make the attack roll and then roll to see whether the attack went astray.)

Second, you and the defender make opposed Strength checks. You each add a +4 bonus for each size category you are larger than Medium or a -4 penalty for each size category you are smaller than Medium. You get a +2 bonus if you are charging. The defender gets a +4 bonus if he has more than two legs or is otherwise exceptionally stable.
Bull Rush Results

If you beat the defender’s Strength check result, you push him back 5 feet. If you wish to move with the defender, you can push him back an additional 5 feet for each 5 points by which your check result is greater than the defender’s check result. You can’t, however, exceed your normal movement limit. (Note: The defender provokes attacks of opportunity if he is moved. So do you, if you move with him. The two of you do not provoke attacks of opportunity from each other, however.)

If you fail to beat the defender’s Strength check result, you move 5 feet straight back to where you were before you moved into his space. If that space is occupied, you fall prone in that space.

[MisterMac]

@Steve:



I've always heard of this referred to as power-gaming in other RP groups, but the concept is a common problem in all forms of RP. The "safe" way to avoid it is to specify that your intended action is an attempt, as mentioned. However, this does leave you somewhat at the mercy of your intended target, and it's only fair that they respond reasonably to your attempt. Reacting to all interaction attempts with the emote equivalent of "down low, too slow" is just as frustrating as having someone else force their emotes onto you.

Given the availability of a robust dice rolling system, however, it would be silly not to take advantage of it.

[wangxiuming]

Just want to point out that godmodding is against the rules and is not limited to NPC interactions.

Godmodding
You only speak for your character's actions, not anyone else's. Do not "godmod" other peoples' characters or NPCs, or dictate their actions without the consent of the character's player or the DM(s) stewarding the NPCs.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=36831

[MisterMac]

I really, really want someone to explain to me what "godmod" is supposed to mean literally. "Godmode" I could get behind, but godmod? I hope it's just a pervasive typo. I'm still going to call it power-gaming, as it's in the same vein of piloting errors as meta-gaming.

[wangxiuming]

I've always known it as godmode / godmoding from my previous server, myself! Maybe someone else with more history here than me can explain.

[Steve]

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... %20modding

god modding
"God Modding" is in essence when someone’s character has the ability to do practically anything without limits or boundaries. And example is when they simply cannot be harmed by any and all means other RP-ers try.

-It can be killing or injuring a character without the player's express permission.
-It can be when they simply can’t be hit and dodge all attacks or anything for this matter aimed at them.
-It can also be using other characters that other people RP with. In other words, if you do not RP as
Legolas, then you cannot have Legolas say anything, or do anything, without the player's express permission.

The absolute worst is when they make out another character to be what they’re not, just to make their own character seem superior. They make others seem weak, screaming for help, when they’ve made it quite clear about their advantages and strengths. This is called power-play. It’s a strain of God-Modding, but instead of just being irritating, it’s offensive to boot.
This is a prime example of God Modding:

Player A: Punches Player B
Player B: Dodges attack, grabs Player A and throws him. Player A flies at Player B, who warps behind him and slashes Player A in the back.

@Mistermac:

Lol. Nice graphic. I probably deserved that.

So let me add context to my post above on Bull Rushing.

D&D is a RP game where we attempt to embody (act) a Character. But the game itself is a mechanics-based, rule-based game, where almost all ACTIONS we have our Character perform, require a Difficulty Check (DC).

Why?

Because we attempt to embody a Character with background, Racial, Skills and powers...that we in Real Life most very likely have no way to portray—and definitely not Epicly!

Thus Actions are filtered through a system of Chance—DCs vs Skills + Dice Roll—in order that a) we can RP said Character (class) Type; b) not god mod; c) experience the game as one of either Success, or Failure...or Both!

So in regard to the OP, which I totally “get,” what was missing, imho, was the Context of how so many Emotes actually need to be backed up by Checks, exactly so 2 Players can equally understand that actions—if even possible to make—have a neutral and Fair chance of occurring, and that RP +/- emoting is not just a system of dominance/submission between strangers behind a computer screen.

Thank you. I’ll let myself out.

[DM Theophanies]

Godmod is short for godmodding. It's described in the server rules:

Godmodding
You only speak for your character's actions, not anyone else's. Do not "godmod" other peoples' characters or NPCs, or dictate their actions without the consent of the character's player or the DM(s) stewarding the NPCs. NPCs are not soulless entities to be disregarded when a DM is not present. Treat them as if they are able to react to your actions regardless if someone is behind the wheel or not.

Minor instances of NPC interactions may however be used, such as and for example: "The merchant said they would spread the rumor I was seeking a special item," or "the bartender takes my order and brings me my drink," or "The local guards gave me directions or information about the laws."

It is also safe to assume obedience of reasonable orders given to subordinate NPCs (for instance, NPC assets controlled by your guild), but not the success of those orders. If you would like to speak directly in these subordinate NPCs' voices, please seek permission from the DM team first and this will be reviewed on a per-case basis. An exception to this is roleplaying your summoned creatures, and this may be done at will with the expectation that the actions roleplayed are appropriate for that type of creature.

[MisterMac]

@Theophanies: Well, we all know what it means, I was just questioning its name because it feels like an accident. Pulling up a reference from urban dictionary since that was just provided by Steve, here's the first result you get for "Godmod" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Godmod

To control another person's roleplaying in an Internet forum or chat room.

To abuse "God-mode" cheats.

To generally be a controlling (hero).

It even uses "god-mode" in its definition.

---

@Steve, your argument is entirely valid, but it begs the question of how much we should let a character sheet determine the evolution of a given scenario. Just as DMs in PnP can and will fudge dice rolls for the sake of narrative, it can be desirable to resolve roleplaying actions without resorting to mechanics because sometimes the mechanics just don't leave enough room for interesting outcomes. That may be because the action being attempted isn't clearly covered by the available attributes or skills (like forging a document, which is related thematically to bluff but isn't verbal or body language) or because the differences in character level are too great to offer a somewhat fair distribution of potential outcomes. In my opinion, if one character significantly out-levels another and insistently uses mechanics to force an outcome, then that's as much godmoding/powergaming as what's outlined in the rules. The end result for the target is the same, and the spirit of the rule as I read it is to avoid that.

[JIŘÍ]

On rp servers in my country is never used "if" tense in emoting and I had no clue of how it is done differently on English servers un til I got punished for it elsewhere.


We always used "hepushs him" and other person would decide outcome. That said various people can do things in different manner in their languages.