How can i make the GM do what i want? Options

[Machiavelli]

Come on, you all try that.^^ Everybody of us has a vision of what your char. should become, which goals he should reach etc. But how (except of telling the GM what you want...which would crumble the "illusion" of the GM being "neutral" a little bít) do you make your GM to act in your wanted direction? Do you use inverted psychology, some nasty tricks like blackmail or bribing or do you try it the hard way (which means roleplaying)?

[Dwight]

How...Machiavellian.

How does it break the functional neutrality of the GM by openly asking something like: "Hey GM I want to to try have my character be this sort of character. Mind if you create perils that test them (and my resolve) in that way so we can see if they, and I, achieve those kinds of goals [or die trying], thus defining of my character in terms of those aspects whether they succeed or fail?"


Or do you mean you are trying to ensure "success" of attaining the goal, without the risk? Which, you know, makes attaining the goal pretty damn hollow....unless your actual goal is to manipulate your [friend?] rather than play the game you suppository agreed to play, or to just show up and run through a pre-written script.

[kzt]

Pizza. And a cool story.

[Machiavelli]

Pizza seems to work worldwide....a penomenon that should be the topic of á socialcultural master or doctor-thesis.^^

@Dwight: no, if i would try it machiavellian-style i would have to kill my GM, his family and everybody that might take revenge in the future. ^^ I am talking more of things like "i played x or y in the past but now i changed my mind. I think my char. is going to evolve in another direction and i want the GM to see this tendency". GMing isn´t an easy thing and maybe the GM has already set up some plans for your char. So i want to force him without too much force in my wanted direction. I hope you understand what i want to express.

[Machiavelli]

Pizza seems to work worldwide....a penomenon that should be the topic of á socialcultural master or doctor-thesis.^^

@Dwight: no, if i would try it machiavellian-style i would have to kill my GM, his family and everybody that might take revenge in the future. ^^ I am talking more of things like "i played x or y in the past but now i changed my mind. I think my char. is going to evolve in another direction and i want the GM to see this tendency". GMing isn´t an easy thing and maybe the GM has already set up some plans for your char. So i want to force him without too much force in my wanted direction. I hope you understand what i want to express.

[Glyph]

It is a combination of having a good, non-adversarial relationship with your GM, roleplaying your character's new direction, and spending your Karma appropriately.

It is a good idea to let your GM know ahead of time if you are going to dramatically change the way you play a certain character, because it is annoying when you set up plot hooks specifically for one character, only for that character to do a 180. But on the flip side, the GM should only be giving you opportunities and challenges, not railroading you or bigfooting your character.

Which comes back to open lines of communication with your GM. Pizza never hurts, though.

[Summerstorm]

Well, i as a GM try to keep an open ear for my players. After every session i ask for critiques, comments. I ask them to send me material about their character: What they want to experience, what their thoughts are on last adventures/runs... what they are planning for the future. I am always trying to get personal stories and new npc's with which to interact into the game and try to let them choose where to follow up.

This is of course totally in contrast to my "The world doesn't revolve about your character"-gameplay, where everyone can die at every minute.

So with the "how can i influence the gm" in mind: I am totally on the side of the players to construct a story, but in my execution i am a ruthless bastard. I don't have to be bribed or threatened to do that.

Ah and i have to say of course: I seldom get any plothooks and "what i like to experience"-material from my players, though. Maybe they are lazy, maybe they are content with what is going on in the game already? I don't know.

So my opinion: Healthy feedback with your gm.

[Machiavelli]

And now we come back to pizza..^^

[kzt]

It always comes back to pizza. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Machiavelli]

If my plan works out, you all get one pizza for free from me.^^

[Neurosis]

Pizza seems to work worldwide....a penomenon that should be the topic of á socialcultural master or doctor-thesis.^^

@Dwight: no, if i would try it machiavellian-style i would have to kill my GM, his family and everybody that might take revenge in the future. ^^ I am talking more of things like "i played x or y in the past but now i changed my mind. I think my char. is going to evolve in another direction and i want the GM to see this tendency". GMing isn´t an easy thing and maybe the GM has already set up some plans for your char. So i want to force him without too much force in my wanted direction. I hope you understand what i want to express.

This is definitely something you should be able to convey through roleplaying. I say this as a GM.

[Machiavelli]

This also fits to my opinion that i want to react on whatever the GM throws at me. I like it "realistic". Some things are beyond your influence.^^

[Dwight]

GMing isn´t an easy thing and maybe the GM has already set up some plans for your char. So i want to force him without too much force in my wanted direction. I hope you understand what i want to express.

Nope. At least not why you aren't going to just out and say it (end of the session, start of the session). Trying to communicate this big picture, planning stuff by encoding/decoding to/from the obscure language of "roleplaying" is a recipe for disappointment, confusion, and frustration around the table....and gets in the way of actually playing the role of the character and playing the game. It is bad basic interpersonal communication.

As a GM I'll say over and over again, you want your character to become Mike The Dragonslayer? Then just spit it out so I can throw some dragons at you rather than having me waste my time and yours with whatever else I would throw at you.

[CanRay]

I've stated to my group, numerous times, that I take bribes as a GM, and am unashamed that I do so.

After all, I have a much bigger toy box. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/devil.gif)

[Dwight]

Of course that assumes a GM that is going to put the effort in to consolidate his goals and vision with yours instead of only focusing on what they want and flip you the bird if their initial pass at a solution doesn't work for you, too. But really then you are left with the very ugly option of base social manipulation anyway, trying desperately to play the GM rather than playing your character and the game.

[Kruger]

Of course that assumes a GM that is going to put the effort in to consolidate his goals and vision with yours instead of only focusing on what they want and flip you the bird if their initial pass at a solution doesn't work for you, too.

How mature.

Anyhow, the easiest way to make sure the GM knows what you want to achieve is to tell him. Then you can discuss whether or not that's even going to be possible in the game and come to an agreement as mature adults to find a common ground you're both willing to work for since everything you want to happen means an effort on the part of the GM to craft the story to your individual desires as opposed to the whole of the group.

I don't think a GM should really ever have to be "manipulated". If you're trying to manipulate the GM, you're either playing a bad campaign or you're the bad player ruining it for everyone else. RPGs aren't a contest, they are a collaborative effort.

[Dwight]

How mature.

What? Linking something very relevant? That OP is the other side of the vicious spiral down. Rand eschewed "coming to an agreement", AKA negotiating a solution everyone was accepting of, AKA collaborative problem solving. That is what makes it the same road to suckville as choosing to "force" the GM via manipulation rather than openly talking. They both are things that tend to lead to the other. Pathological choices that undermine healthy social interactions and leave very unhealthy tools as the ones still on the table. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Kruger]

What would be the "agreement"?

Compromise his vision for the game? As opposed to what? Telling the player in a one time situation that he couldn't do something for a very valid reason? Sure, he could have gone the other way and said "Okay, this time you can break my rules, but in the future you can't or shouldn't." THe game isn't just about that one player. The GM is a player too and should be allowed his vision of how the game should work as well. Especially since he puts in all the work. This wasn't some kind of GM strong-arming. It was simply an establishment of parameters. Is every time the GM won't do something at your demand as a player he's being a bad GM? lol.

If there's a problem with that decision, it comes down to player temper tantrum as opposed to GM bird flipping.

[Ed_209a]

...How does it break the functional neutrality of the GM by openly asking something like: "Hey GM I want to to try have my character be this sort of character.

It is a combination of having a good, non-adversarial relationship with your GM, roleplaying your character's new direction, and spending your Karma appropriately.

It is a good idea to let your GM know ahead of time if you are going to dramatically change the way you play a certain character, because it is annoying when you set up plot hooks specifically for one character, only for that character to do a 180. ...

If you have a good GM, these are both good ideas. Gaming at it's best is really collaborative fiction. A good GM will be happy to let you be an "associate writer" for the game, as long as you accept the fact that he has final editorial approval.

It's important enough to repeat: Communicate Communicate Communicate! A GM who would use your plans against you (other than to create reasonable challenges for you to overcome) is not worth your time. A GM who cackles evilly at how he ground his PCs into the dirt (with his unlimited GM powers) is just as pathetic as someone who puts boxing gloves on 5-year olds, and then takes pride in beating them 4 at a time!

[Dwight]

What was teh 'agreement"?

Exactly. Rand shut it down before one was figured out.

Compromise his vision for the game?

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif) Well if nobody else at the table is digging on it....

As opposed to what?

As opposed to following up his poor planning, communication [of his vision], and decisions ("nobody's perfect" in his words) with summarily shutting down the discussion and dumping the consequences of HIS screw-ups on someone else. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

How do players communicate openly effectively and how do you expect them to trust that path, when the GM arbitrarily shuts it down? EDIT: And you can swap "GM" and "player" in that sentence for this thread's OP.

[Mooncrow]

Exactly. Rand shut it down before one was figured out.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif) Well if nobody else at the table is digging on it....

As opposed to following up his poor planning, communication [of his vision], and decisions ("nobody's perfect" in his words) with summarily shutting down the discussion and dumping the consequences of HIS screw-ups on someone else. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

How do players communicate openly effectively and how do you expect them to trust that path, when the GM arbitrarily shuts it down? EDIT: And you can swap "GM" and "player" in that sentence for this thread's OP.

It's way more important to rule and move on than it is for someone to be "right".

I have an unbreakable rule of "No more than 30 seconds for rules discussion during play". A ruling gets made, the game goes on, and we look stuff up later so we know how we want to handle it for next time.

Discuss rules before play, discuss them after play - never, ever, ever during play.

@OP - any answer that's not "talk with your GM" is going to leave one of you feeling pretty angry in the long run.

[Kruger]

"consequences"? More melodrama. For one action, he told the player he wasn't going to allow him to utilize very blatant meta-game knowledge to affect his character's action. GM's mistake for not making everyone declare. Player's mistake for not conforming to the standards of good role-playing, or at the very least not being familiar enough with the standards of the game being run. Everyone's "at fault" (even though nobody is) and you move on.

A good player says "Oh, yeah, that's true" and moves on.

You seem to be hung up on this idea that the GM making a judgment call in a game snag is some kind of strong-arming and that somehow player characters get total free will even if that free will breaks the confines of the game's structure.

[Dwight]

It's way more important to rule and move on than it is for someone to be "right".

If you want to The Man, it's pretty damn important to not dump the consequences for your mistakes on other people. Clear conflict of interest.

There-in was his [last] crucial mistake...

P.S. I sure didn't get the sense that he went back to it to work it out at the end of the session. Instead he came here to get some validation.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)


EDIT: Which of course brings us to "@OP - any answer that's not "talk with your GM" is going to leave one of you feeling pretty angry in the long run." Exactly! It's the same problem, with the same solution.

[Dwight]

"consequences"? More melodrama.

If they weren't a big deal he could have just run with the game the other way, right?

[Ryu]

Come on, you all try that.^^ Everybody of us has a vision of what your char. should become, which goals he should reach etc. But how (except of telling the GM what you want...which would crumble the "illusion" of the GM being "neutral" a little bít) do you make your GM to act in your wanted direction? Do you use inverted psychology, some nasty tricks like blackmail or bribing or do you try it the hard way (which means roleplaying)?

There are steps to success. Telling what you want is the simplest. Show don´t tell at all is the hardest. If your numbers allign with your backstory and what you want to play, the direction of your char will be obvious in hindsight. If you do really well, everybody including the GM will cheer you on.

I prefer establishing stats that fit with the backstory, and working out everything else according to the campaign. If I wanted to do an 180-degree turn with a char, at least the GM would be pre-warned, as would any player who´s chars territory I would tread on due to the change.