Spirit vs. Letter

[sobrique]

A tough question in a roleplay game, is how much you balance the letter of the rules, against the spirit of the rules.
The art of a good GM is to let the players 'roleplay' without constraining them with 'you can't do that, because there's no rule for it'.
Time and again though, the subject arises. Do you follow the letter, or the spirit of the rules?
Do you fudge that diceroll, because otherwise the character will die in a short and pointless fashion? Do you let the character try to jump on the back of the troll they're fighting, and how do you arbitrate it when there isn't a mechanic.

Do you ever have a monster die when it's 'dramatically appropriate' or do you have it's hitpoints rigidly adhered to?

If you have a gun pressed to someone's eye socket, and pull the trigger, do they still get to dodge/use armour, or are they just toast?

If someone goes out of character for some reason (valid), are they still 'there' and therefore killable?

And does this make a difference in tabletop vs. live action, and player vs. monster, as opposed to player vs. player?

I could put up a poll, but I'll leave that for now. Let me know what you think.

Comments

[badriya.livejournal.com]

I think both current DMs, D and D and the Buffy game, follow the spirit. The Buffy DM was also Shadowrun DM some years ago and then had a very rowdy party to sort out.

He never flinched, even when our drugged-to-the-eyeballs shaman suddenly decided to drag the party to Vladivostok because he fancied acquiring a Russian tank commander's watch.

On looking back, it probably helps if you feed the DM 'interesting' chocolate cookies...

[absintheskiss.livejournal.com]

In tabletop the rules are so much easier to 'be creative with' as a DM as the actions of the players are clear for all to see. If you roll a two, the evidence is before your eyes. You, as ref, can then decide what to do.

In LARP there are no dice, just trust and eagle eyed reffing. If you get two players who give differing accounts of a fight, then the nightmares start. If A did not go down when B hit them, and then A manages to hit B, did that second hit happen or not? How the hell do you decide when it is one players' word against another? When it is NPC V's player it is different again, if the NPC dies the crew member does not get upset if they die, only if they died unfairly as a result of cheating.

The letter of the rules should support the spirit. Should the spirit fall down, you have to fall back on the letter until that spirit is regained.

And I know exactly what you are talking about, and do not envy you at all.

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

One of the problems i have seen the most in LARP, that causes the most verbal conflict is the IC/OC state.

a couple of years back in a system called Omega, a group spent the entire event seriously annoying everyone else IC.. they were doign dodgy deals, slavign etc. the rest of the communities decided during the event to attack the group, the attack wa sgoignt o happen on the last day of the event. It is unclear as to whether they heard about it or not, but on the last day the entire group stayed OC packed up their camp OC during time in and left. Many complaints were had about people being 'attacked' by bandits or ambushed. only for them to say "oh I was out of character".

This lead to the creation of the luminous yellow OC armband. yes i've heard people whinge about needing it and how theyre annoyed when people go OC to go to the loo's etc. etc. But its solved a lot more arguements than its caused.

I do believe that if a person is OC then they cannot be harmed IC. But I also believe that this should not be abused, A person must Indicate so the majority know they are now OC. using the ref-hide handsignal or the oc armband etc. they shouldn't really do it while an ic occurance is happening (without the consent of the participants).

If you are refering to recent events. if an OC assault occured making the recipient of the assault drop out of character to deal with it, then they are unable to deal with events IC becuase they are too busy dealing with the OC injury. They are not 'there'.

but this is just the way I've ruled previously and seen it ruled in other systems.

Table top is different because I find you don't drop in and out of charcater. Like a computer game your character is there always while you are.. plus the pace is slower and more measured, Real time and game time are two entities entirely, so the rules of engagement are different.

Does any of this make sense???

[xarrion.livejournal.com]

I see the primary job of a GM/Ref in an RP game is to keep the action flowing as smoothly as possible. You're effectively in charge of telling a story. For this reason, the spirit is far more important than the letter.

The rules are there for the players to interact with the world and each other without needing constant ref intervention.

The players are the ones who must adhere themselves to the rules. In the end, recording your hits/skill uses/etc on a piece of paper is no different than remembering them in a LARP. If the player doesn't keep them accurate, there's little the GM can do, short of keep the tally's themselves.

When a dispute does occur, the ref should resolve it in a way that keeps the flow/spirit intact for as many people as possible. Fixating on stats and dicerolls isn't really roleplaying, it's just gaming.

[jorune.livejournal.com]

During the weekend freeforms they use a different measure. Each person has a clip on name badge and wearing the badge means you are IC. You are OC when you take off the badge and put it on the main table at Game central. This shows to anyone that you are currently out of the game.

[warmage.livejournal.com]

Ed, I agree with the foul end of the Reffing Stick: Argue with the ref and get bounced. Don't like it? Then play nice or don't play - we're better off without the hysterics because you can't do Called Shot on someone trying to Backstab you.

But in a *nice* game, I agree - fall back on the letter when the spirit is broken.

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

one thing that should be paramount though. Once a decision is made it is made. extenuating circumstances may be taken into account but like a class room once the decision is made it is made.

School yard rules..

[pinkzhazha.livejournal.com]

Always a tough one and lots of questions there.
In my personal opinion its in the spirit of the game, those involved when it really comes down to it, that and the circumstances around each individual event.
Some players are happy to co operate with the ref team and all the other players to allow for a greater enjoyment of game play for everyone involved, they will allow for errors that can be made and for the dramatic moment. Others can be down right unpleasant and want everything their own way.
You generally find the latter will ignore a games system rule book and a multitude of ref calls until it becomes directly to their own personal benefit and then they'll cause hell to get what they want. You can also guarantee that will only tell the part of the story that benefits them and will conveniently “forget” how many hits they personally took in all the excitement. They aren't really worth worrying about, as games are always better of with out them.
The former group will really work well with a RF/GM and only need to be asked in the majority of cases they’d be happy to go with it, or if they felt a bit uncomfortable they are happy to come to some sort of compromise that really causes problems for the character but gives the player a great in-depth of plot and role-play resource on their part. It is such an open question.
I tend to feel that player to monster/npc generally in the players favour but make it have a cost that adds to their role play. Player to player will probably require looking at the bigger picture either way it will again have a role play cost involved. Any good player takes this on board and just enjoys the additional plot. Make them blind or loose and arm etc.

If player is not there it is up to them to ensure it’s very clear that they are not there in game and to make that call the moment something happens and not make any role play calls what so ever, if they make any call asides from and immediate “not here” they’ve announced themselves back in the game. Confusion can be avoiding by having all areas of the game site clearly in character or out of character. Or if you wish that line to blur make it very clear what the arrangement is. loos ebign an ovious place, You can talk in character but not carry out any actions etc.

It is generally advisable to go with the ruling that was made at the time of the event by the refs involved otherwise every last action on every last game can be brought into question at some point or other. It would be only fair to allow any other player with any game call issues from any past event from the beginning of the system a chance to readdress their own ref calls which would entail going over the past records of everybody who was ever involved, which would be horrible horribly messy and time consuming. If the ref say it goes just like in any other sport. Yup refs screw up, players screw up, monster screw up but that’s part of it, a good player is one who accepts this and hasn’t entirely miss the point or role play, it’s fun, not a law court.

[jorune.livejournal.com]

When I can interact with all the players, then I may move outside the letter of the law. This will be to add something that I consider what will increase the players enjoyment of the game. While it may awe or startle players it should not upstage the players as they are the stars of the show and should get top billing. So throughout wfrp there was blatant fudging to allow people through to the next scene because it worked for the story.

When I cannot interact with all the players then I always work within the rules that are laid down. This establishes a common framework we can all agree on, without this then the game only continues on the strength of opinion. Without a common framework we are working with best intentions, waiting for someone persuasive to change everything to their viewpoint. I believe that a large multiplayer should work collectively, otherwise we are working with an unstable mixture of favouritism and whim.

When a flaw in the rules is found and an immediate ruling is required, then I will pick the course is most just. It should work in harmony with the rest of the rules. Law plus Goodness = Justice. After a new ruling then it should communicated to the other ref's or players as soon as feasible.

Moving in and out of character should be clearly described in the rules so confusion does not occur. If you are OC the rules should dictate a situation where it is obvious. If you are OC then you should not interact with the game and you should remove yourself from the game area. Once this has happened OC players are not in game and therefore no action may be taken against them or by them.

When you work within the law you are entitled to the protections laid down in the law. When you work outside the law you may or may not surrender access to those remedies. The aspect of goodness is when you decide whether it was an honest mistake or negligence; Forgiveness, redemption. You can ask the player to accept that they made a mistake and accept the consequences of that mistake. Your situation as ref will be made a lot easier if the players can mutually agree a solution that you are comfortable with.

A just decision made within the law is easier to explain to a room of 40 than one based on backroom discussions.

[iamnotramphus.livejournal.com]

Always the spirit. But I guess you knew I would say that already...

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Aye. That I did. In many senses, I agree. Problem is, the case in point ...

(ack, I think I'll say no more on a public medium)

[sebbo.livejournal.com]

well, i have a tendency to go with ref is law, whichever way it goes. Part of it me being too lazy to try and learn all the rules there are, part of it is simply to avoid arguments and just keep the game flowing. It's a game and if i believed that the ref or another player did want to cause me oc harm by being mean or unfair to my character then I wouldn't be in a game with them in the first place.

At the end of the day its a nice way to spend time with people you like and get on with well.

In a Larp this may differ, as the player base is mostly quite dramatically bigger than that in a table top. I'd still go with the "ref call is law", as i'm not there to argue over some rule, but to enjoy myself roleplaying. Rules give a framework within which to act, but they cannot possibly cover all and every nuance of the interactions amongs players and npc's, so they shouldn't, and as such are only a strong or weak guideline depending on group preferences.

[phyrbyrd.livejournal.com]

I wonder, would I have been allowed to get away with it that time, had I said 'Bugger off - my set, my song, my moment, shoot someone else!' At least I wouldn't have got told off for kicking the poor guy...

[paulbroz.livejournal.com]

I'd have said bugger off, that or "dodge" "10 Through" "10 Through"...