Things RPG Players SHOULD be allowed to do.

We've all see the lists of things that RPG Players have been banned from doing. Here is ours

While funny, I would argue that there are things that players should be allowed to do.

The only things that should definitely be banned are Reality Abuse and Loophole Abuse, with a long hard look at Not Roleplaying.

The first two come from rules trying to define reality, and, unsurprisingly, not covering all of it, or creating conflicts to be abused. "While, yes the rules do allow a sword that does 20d100 damage to be created I do not because it is Loophole abuse."

With continued Loophole abusers get creative (and by creative I mean nasty)

Abuser, on his 20th attempt. "Look, if I follow these rules precisely, I can make a 20d100 sword."
Long suffering GM "Okay"
Later...

DM "The dragon wakes."
Abuser "I draw my 20d100 sword."
DM "Ok. However it turns out the reason nobody else makes swords like that is the process fatally weakens the metal. It snaps of 1 cm above the hilt. You are facing a Fully grown dragon with a small shard of metal..."

Role playing (and its failure) is a tricky one. The answer is probably to reward good role playing, and punish bad, preferably in game.

Elf "Oy Lawn Ornament"
Dwarf PC "I ignore him"
GM "You do understand that is the deadliest insult - you have been raised so it is a kind of beserk button" PC "Don't care because [meta gaming excuse- some rule disadvantage]"

Later...

GM (As King of the Dwarves) "It has come to our attention that you failed to respond to the insults of the Elves [I guess that elf bragged] and have diminished the Dwarven nation. You must divest yourself of all dwarven artifacts, as you are declared Not a Dwarf. If after sunset tonight you are ever found in possession of a Dwarven artefact, your life is forfeit"

Of course if the player roleplayed it - he was time bound on a matter of great honour, and he showed his stress ("I will remember the elfs face, and swear vengeance on him, but I can not stop, for I have just an hour to destroy the dark jewel") that is fine - it is role play.

Everything else IS fine. An example on the other thread was about calling a blue skinned race smurfs.

How I would have done it

"Make a local knowledge check [or game equivalent]" If they pass, you warn the players Smurf in this culture is the N-Word, do they wish to reconsider.

If they fail, allow them to say it, then as the BIG blue person gets up, say "Oh, it appears smurf must be the local equivalent of N-word..."

But Smurf is not in this canon, you point out. True. But neither is your players language. If your players are insulting someone, that insult will probably have an equivalent in world.

If players act like idiots 1) Check- "You do realise you are being idiots?" then escalate if needed to punishment "At this point the city watch arrive. Because they have heard there are some idiot adventurers spoiling for a fight, they have recruited 20 high level paladins who just happened to be passing through the town on pilgrimage..."

edited 21st Mar '13 5:00:43 PM by LastHussar

I can't tell whether you're taking a joke thread too seriously, making a very meta joke, or just genuinely don't see that "you're not allowed to do X" and "you can do X but I will punish you harshly for it" are not really that different.

Ah, punishing players. Because nothing gets an RPG to roll smoothly than open hostility between players and GM.

edited 21st Mar '13 6:31:15 PM by Ghilz

Serious post. I realise it is a joke thread, but unfortunately I have been in games where actions have been constrained by the GM. Just starting a conversation.

I'm still bemused that you don't consider "do this and I will make your character's life a living hell" to be a form of constraint.

Indeed. Especially looking at the example for punishing rules lawyering.

"Don't you try to get clever with me because I will unleash arbitrary consequences on you. Live in fear!" is somehow less constraining than "Dude, the 20d100 sword is stupid and even if wasn't and I allowed it, it would take the challenge out of the game and make it boring for you and everyone else."

EDIT: Actually I don't even get the grass ornament elf dwarf example? "If your players play to their characters and in doing so dont react to npc the way you wanted to, make their life hell?"

edited 21st Mar '13 6:45:00 PM by Ghilz

Make a human bard that is clearly Lemmy Kilmister of Motörhead.

Because that would be awesome.

In what Insane Troll Logic way does that make sense?

The Elf bragged? Of what?

Elf: "So these guys totally broke my shit and didn't react to my insult. I am so hardcore!" o_O

And the Dwarf king has nothing better to do then enforce a ban for people who don't react Elven insults (Coz that somehow affects the Dwarves....). Man, glad he's not busy running a kingdom or something so he has time to listen to every Elf's petty complaints. And that the reaction of non-dwarves somehow reflect on the dwarves... Also if he's supposed to hate elves, shouldn't he be glad they broke the lawn ornament?

Plus the obvious difficulty of killing someone who holds an artifact. Since those tend to be powerful and people trying to murder their owner sort of happen to be on the wrong end of the artifact.

Only in D&D and games immediately associated with it.

I sense a bitter GM or a player who only wants others to play in the way s/he does.

Nah, Relics in Deathwatch, Magical Items in Savage Worlds (They are so rare they all might as well qualify), etc...

I was referring to the use of the word "artifact". It might be that artifact refers to something completely mundane in the context.

Even if it just meant "Dwarven stuff", it doesn't make the whole scenario make any more sense.

I guess logic is that dwarfs vs elves is so prevelaivent(sp?) that dwarf king would be insulted at dwarf who doesn't punish elf for insults?*shrugs* Either way, VERY petty and silly. And illogical.

So he would take the word of an asshat from the race he despises over his own countrymen? Yeah, I'd call bullshit on that if I was the dwarf player.

On the Lawn Ornament thing:

If the dwarves in your campaign are so proud and touchy that they respond with exile for failing to respond to a minor insult...

...then this is something you should tell your players ahead of time. Ideally while they are weighing up their choice of races. "Oh, by the way, in this campaign dwarves have to fly off the handle when called lawn ornaments, it's the law - you should bear that in mind if you want to play a dwarf," that kind of thing.

It should not be something you pull out of your arse to punish the player for failing to follow your carefully laid railroad tracks.

Oh, so the elf is calling the dwarf a lawn ornament....

...k... so that fixed one of many, many questions about this scenario.

The dwarf thing was a v. quick example. Don't get hung up about the precise scenario.

On the flip side one if the 'Not allowed to do' is "dress my crew members in red uniforms."

I would ask "Why not?" Yeah the star trek thing but, why can't the employer say what his uniform policy should be?

Its a ROLE playing game, not a ROLL playing game. If you had a fez, a bowtie and a TARDIS why not just go back and Nuke the original Dalek facility?

Well, if a significant portion of the crew had watched certain 'Historical Broadcasts', sudden uniform changes might lead to a pretty sharp drop in morale.

Also, if you're playing the "ROLE" properly, you wouldn't drop the bomb. The races of the universe banding together against the Daleks is one of the fixed points in time that the Time Lords wouldn't change.

edited 23rd Mar '13 11:13:54 AM by onFyre

Also coz the Doctor was there at the creation of the Daleks so he'd be crossing in his own time stream which is sort of a big no no especially if it involves nuking your past self.

...So what does this have to do with rolling anyway?

Also you'd not dress mooks in red out of fear of an obvious star trek reference? ...Why?

edited 23rd Mar '13 11:26:31 AM by Ghilz

Tone-slaying.

In a goofy game, by all means dress everyone in red. If the game is supposed to be serious, though, doing something like that just for the sake of a joke will pull people out of the game.

@Last Hussar: For a thread about what players should be allowed to do, you do seem to be spending a lot of time arguing that there are things they shouldn't.