It always depends on the game. Nothing is ever always right or wrong.
Assuming the other players like role playing, and the GM wants roleplay, then it's just not a game for you to be in. If everyone feels like the GM is pushing it down their throats, talk to him, and if he doesn't want to stop, GM your own game.
Understand that it's called a "role playing" game, not just a game, and so people can want the former as well as--or even more than--the latter. It's about the whole group having fun, and if they're heavy on RP, and you're not, there are various ways to go about it. Maybe make a anti-social character, or a mute. Ask them to tone it down a little, maybe. In the end, if you're not having fun, there's always making your own game.
Whats the general opinion? Is it ok for a player to simply engage in the parts of the game they like as long as they're not disruptive during the parts they don't, or should everyone be forced into certain parts of the game, even if it makes it less fun for them?
Obviously you can't force anyone to do anything, you are a human being with actions and emotions and can always walk away. There is definitely a need to be somewhat there, and some people feel awkward or like your taking up space if you aren't participating. I'd say it varies from game to game. Some games are heavy on roleplay and expect you to always play a part, and others are perfectly fine with you being a wallflower and only 1 or 2 people ever speaking to NPCs.
Its mandatory that I say something cheesy like; The important thing is that your all having fun. Part of that is that and that if something isn't working then you might need to change it or alter it. Or not, sometimes its just not your game and just like you can't force someone to play, you can't force others to play with you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Deciding whether or not to participate in the bar fight is totally roleplaying, for starters. Everything your character does, as well as every mechanical choice you make, is roleplaying. Power Attack vs Combat Expertise, for example. Taking the former means you prefer offense over defense, and vice versa for the latter.
Next time, what you need to do is have a Session Zero; before any actual adventuring begins, everybody gets together and does their own introductions of sorts; the players, with DM input (not commands, input) figure out how they already know each other and why they're traveling together and why they're teammates.
if nothing else ... a bar fight EVERY time? GM needs some new material.
I think what matters here is how your group as a whole feels about it.
If having your character effectively absent/sitting and ignoring them whenever they do an intro scene is going to ruin the game for them, then either some kind of compromise is in order or you could even end up having to find a new group.
If it's purely your GM putting this on you and the rest of the group don't mind a bit, then having your character be "the quiet one" sitting in the corner during that bar fight, or "the sleepy one" who just didn't wake up in time to get there until it was all over is perfectly fine.
As for the bar fight after bar fight after bar fight... yeah that sounds a bit tiresome to me - although my objection would be that it's just more combat when I'd rather sit around in RP conversations to do a proper intro ;) If it's some kind of theme he's trying to build into the overall story, then I can understand it, but otherwise it just seems unimaginative.
However, perhaps he's making every intro a bar fight so you *can* get involved and hit the dice game early without doing all that talky stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way I see it, this is your free time.
Your valuable free time.
And you get to spend it as you see fit.
In my group I sometimes have players falling asleep, or checking email, or playing some sort of online game.
I don't have a problem with any of these.
When I need them to respond, they do so and otherwise know what's going on.
I would rather they be full on engaged with the wonderful, wonderful world that I have developed (because that's how I spend my free time)but as long as they meet the minimums of involvement they are free to spend their free time as they see fit.
It works.
|
At that point I was pissed and declared full out attack lethal damage and he began to protest "its a bar fight", "there's etiquette to follow", "you don't want to escalate."
I would guess that the GM had intended some sort of story-line off this fight.
In RL, there is no etiquette in a bar fight. What there is IS a character's alignment and the consequences of the action. In lawless town, brawls are probably more deadly. In a more civilized town where the town guard does their job well, townfolk would be more inclined to report an assault and murder.
In my own campaign, I started the players in a mining town where the local sheriff is tough on major crime (murder, robbery, etc), but does not have much time for minor crime (brawling, disturbing the peace, etc). It gives the players some license to cause mischief. If they want to go lethal during a bar brawl or steal from a merchant, they have that option, but if they are seen and identified by an NPC that is willing to step forward, they could be in for some real trouble.
Your DM sounds like a control freak. He needs to be reminded that RPGs are cooperative games, not just among the players, but among the players and the GM. If he wants to control the actions of every character, he can write a blinkin' novel.
Yeah I guess its less the insistance that I have to RP even. It's more the fact that he continuously insists that there are protocols in each social setting. He's a big believer in that the entire point of the game is to simulate cinematic or fantasy literature. So he asks me what I do then protests when I don't do what he likes. It irritates to no ends really.
Ouch, that sucks. That sounds like he's not really letting you play a character the way you want or giving you much control over the story. I mean, reenacting scenes in a story can be pretty fun, but if that's not your gig then that's just rough to deal with. Personally, I've always thought control over your character and the story is one of the most important things about an RPG.
*headdesk* sorry to rant.
Pfft, we all do it from time to time.
Time to try DMing. Seriously.
I don't mean that as "put yourself in his shoes and see how it feels". I mean "I think you might enjoy the process and the group as a whole might benefit."
One thing I've seen done in the past is a "guest DM". In the middle of a story arc, assuming things are ultra-dire, the guest DM steps in for a session, introduces a mini-issue for the PCs to address, runs the game for the night, wraps things up, and next week things go back to normal. That's one way to get a taste...
Well, my opinion is that your current DM is railroading you. Not cool. Act accordingly.
I think you're playing the wrong game. It's like going to Taco Bell and being upset that they won't sell you a Big Mac. There are plenty of other games that have nice systems (far more mechanical and systematized than PF for that matter) that you could get into. Do your research and find a game that has the combat aspect without the roleplay. But don't sit down at a table where everyone is playing Texas Hold'em and complain because you're trying to play Blackjack.
!? This just sounds like you skim read his posts. The problem is his GM is overbearing and controlling. Not that he's being asked to RP more than he is comfortable with, certainly not that he's playing the wrong game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He is volunteering a lot of his time to try and entertain you and your friends, free of charge.
Is the player not doing the same? Is the GM still okay if he tells you what to do and how to do it, despite control over your character being one of the few things you do have? Both sides volunteer time, and both sides deserve respect. Ideally your all friends and you should all be trying to help each other have a fun time.
Gotta be careful or it turns into an entitlement thread of some sort. That's never a good thing.
You're not running this game. You wanted to play. So you are showing up to HIS table. Not yours.
When people sit down at my games, I consider it 'our table' personally. No one gets to claim they own the game and everything in it. Likely someone does literally own the table, but the game itself is something you all sit down with. Power dynamics change here and there, but hopefully everyone is caring about each other's interest and not just their own.
lol Kaz to be fair I've actually been a part of this group for 4 years. the GM has been here 6 months.
The GM has been here 6 months and he's started 8 campaigns in that time? That doesn't sound like my kind of group.
Honestly, I don't see how the GM can possible be railroading you when he has the incredible audacity to ask your character to react to what happens in the first session, and then you explode at him later for prompting your character that killing the city guards could be an improper response to the situation.
I must respectfully disagree with your portrayal of what the OP described. Maybe I missed something in reading, but I don't get that at all.
What I get is "oh, hey, look, you're in a bar and someone starts a brawl... what do you do?" being answered by "I don't get involved, and leave." Only the DM won't let that fly.
At my table, it's the player's choice if their character engages a given hook. It's the DM's job to produce plot hooks that his characters will find interesting. Plain and simple.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some GMs have their own weird ideas of what constitutes a good game and believe that every player would enjoy that way if only they'd 'get with the programme'. It is both insulting the intelligence of the players and being incredibly arrogant, and rarely gives a good game.
I'm afraid that the best option is to simply walk away from the game. If you are not enjoying yourself then you shouldn't be there - as others have said, it is a game that you play voluntarily in your free time.
I recently joined a game that was centred around a GM and his girlfriend. There were problem within the group (he really favoured his girlfriend's character and loved his NPCs to the point of Mary Sue-dom) but I put up with it for a while.
Then one of the other players took over GMing and imposed his own ideas. This was essentially a dice-free way to play Pathfinder character interactions, with a player role-playing everything instead of taking any notice at all of the character's abilities. Not great. His campaign started with the PCs having been robbed and kidnapped and having to do missions for the NPC boss just to get their gear back. Oddly enough, I didn't feel inclined to cooperate but apparently resistance wasn't part of the plan. Add to this the fact that his game mainly consisted of sight-seeing his carefully-constructed city, and I really felt that I didn't want play this game any more. I had built a character for one game and was now being made to play another.
I made my excuses and left. I think that this is valid reaction to any game that you are not enjoying because you are being made to play by someone else's idea of 'fun'. The One True Way GM is the killer of many a game.
At a table noone is supposed to be "The Boss", be it player or DM. Seems like you have both kinds at your table.
|
For some GMs, it's cool. Some might want to actually surprise the players with THEIR plots.
Admittedly, my opinion is somewhat influenced by his attitude and statements in the other thread, where he made it know that he considers GMs incompetent until they manage to prove otherwise to his standards, and he lets them know this.
Smurf. Just because I'm pissed right now and trying to smile
It sounds to me like you have way more issues with boring repetition and a lack of hook to the plot hooks than anything so broad and vague as all RPing.
This.
I have to wonder why you guys have to keep meeting? Why are you restarting so frequently?
Do you guys have trouble finishing or sticking to campaigns, or is there just a high rate of TPK?
To me, the issue sounds deeper than wanting to sit out parts you don't like. You genuinely sound in a rut.