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.

Author Topic: "...so tell me what that looks like"  (Read 4227 times)

Warder

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #30 on: March 29, 2021, 06:23:56 PM »
If somebody enjoys describing violent stress relief who am i as a gm to rob them of that possibility? If i see the players dont want to hear about another bucket of blood beeing spilled i stop myself and start on another subject. Also the question makes me want to snark reflexivly. It does not make me expect fun times ahead. So eh.

Visitor Q

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2021, 05:10:31 AM »
The time for the player to make input is when he announces his action, not after resolution.  If the player says, "I take his head off with my sword, or at least try to" and the dice decree a kill, then I say "His head makes a gentle arc, bounces twice, and rolls to your feet, a slightly surprised look on his face."  If the player says "I attack" and the dice are favorably disposed, the I just say "Okay, he's down," or "You take him in the chest and he folds."  The "Mercer" things you're describing, or whatever it is, is just weird.


...after a few more moments of thought this is just another application of "Players control their character, GMs control the rest of the world."  If you're giving players narrative control of the world, then you're starting to move out of classic RPGs and into something else.

The hobby develops. Otherwise we'd all still be playing Chainmail. Keep what you like, discard the rest. As a GM the only question that need concern you is did you and your players have fun?
Obviously things can develop with time, and RPGs can become more refined as we better understand the concept. But I would say that is certainly not the only concern.

Other concerns are:
  • How much fun did everyone have?
  • How likely are people going to want to keep playing this campaign?
  • How likely are they going to want to keep playing this game system?
  • How invested are they in the game world and the story?
  • How much fondness and nostalgia will they have about this campaign after it's over?

You can have plenty of fun in a one-shot where you're level 20 and you kill thousands of orcs. No one would say that's a good way to run a normal game, just like no one would say the happiness of a night of hookers and blow has anything to do with a life full of joy.

All of this is included in what I said.

SirFrog

  • Newbie
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 27
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #32 on: April 04, 2021, 12:45:22 PM »
I have allowed players to describe some kill shots for decades. My rule of thumb is the kill has to be an important or particularly tough opponent, and the final blow either comes after a LONG tough battle, or a crit/massive damage roll. Even then it's usually only 1 time per player and not every session.

I’ve let players do this ages as well. It is a reward for getting the killing blow.

Mercer kind of ruined it for me to a degree. I had someone accuse me of copying Mercer; I told them that “Mercer copied me...probably.” 😂

Valatar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • V
  • Posts: 338
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #33 on: April 04, 2021, 01:53:45 PM »
That's why I've always liked the supremely gory crit tables in the Warhammer RPGs.  Exploding someone's arm in a shower of flesh and blood is way more interesting than having done 23 damage.  A suitably on the ball GM could always narratively describe the damage being done in something other than simple hit point numbers, but in my experience that's not common since they're usually busy dealing with the mechanics of a fight.

agkistro13

  • Newbie
  • *
  • a
  • Posts: 3
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2021, 04:07:51 PM »
I'll let players describe their kills as a way to exploit/extend the positive energy in the room after a really lucky die roll to make the moment more memorable, but of course I'm describing critical failures.

Brick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • B
  • Posts: 1
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #35 on: April 22, 2021, 03:25:31 PM »
My DM always said, "The red dragon falls over and says, 'GACK!'" Worked for us.

Lunamancer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1293
Re: "...so tell me what that looks like"
« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2021, 05:46:56 PM »
Since the succession of Covid lockdowns put an end to game group meetings here I have been listening to a lot of online rpg sessions via YouTube. Doing so I noticed, then found irritating and have now come to hate the climactic death scene commentaries.

GM "...and he goes down, sinking slowly to his knees, his last faltering breaths wasted, cursing you and your kin. <pause for effect>
...............So tell me what that looks like"

Where the fuck did that come from?  Have a whole array of GMs simultaneously adopted the Mercerism "Howd'ya wanna do this?" or is it now supposed to be a required part of the way games are run? One stream I was watching the GM extended it to every critical hit the PCs made.

Speaking for myself, it goes back to the 90's, when there was a 1E vs 2E edition war, where the 2E people wouldn't constantly be painting 1E as a mindless wargame, where the only option was kill, not like all the fancy options in the fighters splatbook for taking people alive. Like 2E actually has a rule for pulling your punch. People felt you couldn't do that without a special rule saying you can. I found myself having to explain the whole "hit points are not all physical" thing which Gary spells out nicely in 1E, and that a logical consequence of that is when you strike someone down to zero hit points, they're basically your bitch at this point. If you don't announce some other intent (like subdual), the assumed/default intent is to kill. But you could opt to do pretty much anything else instead.

Well, if you take that to heart, to the point where players consider their intent on each and every attack, that can burden the game some. So why not worry about intent only after you hit to speed things up. And then why not only after the hit that puts the opponent down to zero. And at that point you're pretty much there. The missing piece is easily inspired by the highly popular video game at the time, Mortal Kombat, and it's like, "Okay, describe your Finish Him."
That's my two cents anyway. Carry on, crawler.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito.