"I should have killed the whole party right there."

[hawkeyefan]

Wouldn’t there be any number of other approaches? I mean…it’s up to the GM how the NPC would react. And different GMs might even take the exact same details and scenario and come up with totally different ways to handle it.

I think sometimes “most plausible” becomes a problem when “plausible” works just fine.

 

[CRKrueger]

Wouldn’t there be any number of other approaches? I mean…it’s up to the GM how the NPC would react. And different GMs might even take the exact same details and scenario and come up with totally different ways to handle it.

I think sometimes “most plausible” becomes a problem when “plausible” works just fine.

What any other GM would have done differently is completely irrelevant. I’m not advocating capping an idiot in every situation.

 

[hawkeyefan]

What any other GM would have done differently is completely irrelevant. I’m not advocating capping an idiot in every situation.

Ah, I was talking generally, with the OP in mind as well.

If we’re talking specifically about your situation, let me make sure I follow.

So you had your PC shoot another PC to avoid what you thought was a likely TPK scenario, right? And then someone posted a meme of Frank from Sunny “So anyway, I started blasting” and you took that as more than a joke? I’d say you’re looking for offense.

If we’re talking about the game situation, then I would have likely said, player to player, “you’re going to get us all killed” or any number of other preliminary steps before executing another player’s character. And to be fair, maybe you did but didn’t include that in your description, but if not then I’d say that was probably a good place to start.

 

[CRKrueger]

Ah, I was talking generally, with the OP in mind as well.

If we’re talking specifically about your situation, let me make sure I follow.

So you had your PC shoot another PC to avoid what you thought was a likely TPK scenario, right? And then someone posted a meme of Frank from Sunny “So anyway, I started blasting” and you took that as more than a joke? I’d say you’re looking for offense.

If we’re talking about the game situation, then I would have likely said, player to player, “you’re going to get us all killed” or any number of other preliminary steps before executing another player’s character. And to be fair, maybe you did but didn’t include that in your description, but if not then I’d say that was probably a good place to start.

Player<->Player talk wasn’t allowed during tense situations like that at the table, only Player<->GM. If I said you’re going to get us all killed, that would have happened ”In-game”.

When I said Mad-Max style Warlord, I meant it. There’s bodies hanging from scaffolding all on the approaches to the HQ, we know from talking to the populace, that you could be killed for anything the Warlord wishes, but he keeps the people safe and fed, which is rare in the anarchy following The Virus, on that world.

Could I have pistol-whipped him from behind? Sure, but a guaranteed knockout is by no means guaranteed, it’s not like I’m good at that. Thus starts a melee or gunfight amongst the party, which doesn’t have a great chance of stopping the Warlord from having us gunned down, or the guards doing it anyway.

Could I have put the gun to his head, tell him to shut up, he doesn’t speak for us, and ask the Warlord to punish only him? Sure, but again, there’s no guarantee the PC doesn’t start a fight, especially if he thinks he’s going to die anyway. He draws on the Warlord, that gets the guards killing us, without the Warlord’s command.

His own party killing him is something the Warlord would have done himself, so it would garner us some level or respect in our dealings, at least more than we had. Also, killing the guy the guards knew they were about to kill anyway might not get them to open up on us, especially if I dropped the gun and apologized to the Warlord for what the PC said, not for killing the PC.

All that was left was would this guy push the Warlord to that level? The GM was Roleplaying the Warlord, I saw his face after the PC’s last words, and I knew the hammer would fall.

So, that was my read on it. After the game I asked the GM if he thought I did the right thing. “Pretty much” was the reply. I asked him there was anything else I could have done that would have saved the party, “Nothing else I can think of.”

So, carefully thought out ruthlessness as a last resort isn’t exactly being nonchalant about it. Frank was there alright, he was the other guy and I was trying to prevent him from starting blasting.

Asking about the situation gets context. Assuming you know everything and tossing a meme that’s practically a textbook definition of the opposite of what happened gets you called on it.

 

[chuckdee]

Sure it was. You said quite confidently “Oh there are other approaches other than killing him that don't end up with the Warlord killing the party.” as if you were the GM playing the Warlord and actually knew that. If it wasn’t clear, I was pointing out that you weren’t sitting at that table, playing that game, so declaring such was specious at best.

But...that’s kind of the point isn’t it? Short, drive by, sarcastic comments don’t really get much of a point across, and can be taken a variety of ways, which is usually their intent, a way to get a shot in with plausible deniability.

So, you want to tell me all the other approaches that would have worked?

There are always other approaches one could take of varying efficacy depending on the player and the GM- that's why they call it roleplaying. It's not a story as I think you've pointed out quite effectively, so there is no one right way of doing things. FOR THE THIRD TIME, I wasn't disparaging anything you did. I actually thought it quite inventive. But being an open-ended RPG, there are ALWAYS other ways of doing things. Not necessarily better, but different as fits different characters and characterizations. That's the beauty of the hobby.

And yes, I didn't directly answer your question with examples, because I find the question quite specious and looking for a fight where there is none, so I choose not to engage. Of course, your response to this will be something disparaging, but, in all honesty, I don't give a fuck. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I come here for an honest exchange of ideas with people that want to talk about such open-ended conversations and not take a posted meme to heart, not to stir shit up. So I'll add again for the fourth time, hopefully to get you to lay down your pitchfork and tune down the aggro, in all caps for emphasis, bolded, underlined, and italicized, I WASN'T DISPARAGING YOU OR ANYTHING YOU DID.

 

[CRKrueger]

There are always other approaches one could take of varying efficacy depending on the player and the GM- that's why they call it roleplaying. It's not a story as I think you've pointed out quite effectively, so there is no one right way of doing things. FOR THE THIRD TIME, I wasn't disparaging anything you did. I actually thought it quite inventive. But being an open-ended RPG, there are ALWAYS other ways of doing things. Not necessarily better, but different as fits different characters and characterizations. That's the beauty of the hobby.

And yes, I didn't directly answer your question with examples, because I find the question quite specious and looking for a fight where there is none, so I choose not to engage. Of course, your response to this will be something disparaging, but, in all honesty, I don't give a fuck. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I come here for an honest exchange of ideas with people that want to talk about such open-ended conversations and not take a posted meme to heart, not to stir shit up. So I'll add again for the fourth time, hopefully to get you to lay down your pitchfork and tune down the aggro, in all caps for emphasis, bolded, underlined, and italicized, I WASN'T DISPARAGING YOU OR ANYTHING YOU DID.

I heard you when you said that you meant nothing negative. I also heard you when you said it sounded like Frank to you. Characterizing someone as Frank isn’t negative to you? Come on.

You’re protesting way to much. If you wanted a honest exchange of ideas, you would have done so, and said something like Hawkeye did. You chose instead to characterise the taken actions as those of Frank and then claim you meant nothing negative by it. Even after my explanation of the context, and the judgement of the actual GM, you’re still on about all the other options in a white room, contextless, general argument.

Is it that hard to say you pulled the trigger a little quick and you got one wrong?

BTW, attempting to chalk this one up as me going aggro isn’t going to work. I’m not taking your meme to heart, I’m simply discussing its intended meaning.

 

[AsenRG]

CRKrueger that's uncalled for. If you want to consider the intended meaning, consider that I might have posted the same picture...since I don't even know, or can't remember at least, who da F that Frank character is.
The picture itself? Yeah, it's funny.
And the player in question was an idiot to play bold in front of the "Mad Max-style" Warlord.
You can only do that once you've proven yourself as at least a cut above the rest...say, by beating his champion, or something! And even then it's going to be risky.

 

[CRKrueger]

CRKrueger that's uncalled for. If you want to consider the intended meaning, consider that I might have posted the same picture...since I don't even know, or can't remember at least, who da F that Frank character is.
The picture itself? Yeah, it's funny.
And the player in question was an idiot to play bold in front of the "Mad Max-style" Warlord.
You can only do that once you've proven yourself as at least a cut above the rest...say, by beating his champion, or something! And even then it's going to be risky.

It’s funny, but it also has a meaning and a point. He admitted he was commenting on the situation as sounding like Frank to him and still claims there were many other successful choices that could have been taken. Me objecting to the characterization is uncalled for? I’m not crying PA and reporting, I’m discussing the characterization and why it’s false.

 

[AsenRG]

It’s funny, but it also has a meaning and a point. He admitted he was commenting on the situation as sounding like Frank to him and still claims there were many other successful choices that could have been taken. Me objecting to the characterization is uncalled for? I’m not crying PA and reporting, I’m discussing the characterization and why it’s false.

OK, but I'm suspecting you put more thought into the picture after it was posted, than he did before posting it. And the overthinking and nitpicking "now what did you mean by that" is quickly getting into the "uncalled for" territory, IMO.
Just, like, drop the matter, man. It's one funny picture, no skin off your nose...or wherever else!

 

[CRKrueger]

OK, but I'm suspecting you put more thought into the picture after it was posted, than he did before posting it. And the overthinking and nitpicking "now what did you mean by that" is quickly getting into the "uncalled for" territory, IMO.
Just, like, drop the matter, man. It's one funny picture, no skin off your nose...or wherever else!

Bleah, memes are communication, just like words. If he asked “Was your character Frank, from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia?”, it’s the same thing, but isn’t open to other interpretations that are more plausibly deniable.

I instantly thought exactly what he meant, that I acted like Frank, and he admitted as such.

On the other hand, I usually have absolutely no clue what you commenting on a post with ”Wow” means.

 

[AsenRG]

Bleah, memes are communication, just like words. If he asked “Was your character Frank, from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia?”, it’s the same thing, but isn’t open to other interpretations that are more plausibly deniable.

I instantly thought exactly what he meant, that I acted like Frank, and he admitted as such.

Well, Frank would have probably shot'im, too...he seemed happy with that gun in hand!

However, that Frank, whoever that is, would do something, doesn't make it "something only Frank would do". I already said I'd have shot him as well - and I've done worse to other PCs, but let's leave it at that, mkay?

On the other hand, I usually have absolutely no clue what you commenting on a post with ”Wow” means.

Probably because it might mean different things, depending on the content of the post in question!
With a choice between 5 reactions (actually 6...), I can only be so specific, man...don't tell my wife, but I've actually got more than 5 feelings, and way more reactions than that!
So some of the 5 reactions just have to pull extra duty...it's inevitable!

 

[chuckdee]

Characterizing someone as Frank isn’t negative to you?

No it isn't. I've seen memes and short clips. I've never seen the whole show. Never seemed interesting other than those parts. And from there, no I wouldn't characterize it as negative. But whatever at this point- you think what you want to, based on what you think I meant, or either what I said I meant... it doesn't really matter at that point. And yeah, you're going aggro over one pic and ignoring everything else.

 

[Skarg]

Depends on your POV. The hero always has a good reason ... but then that's the way the author invariably writes it, isn't it? Even in the cases where the protagonist's defiance ends badly, how often does the author write it that his/her motives are screwy? Other than the story being a training montage, ever?

How often? In fiction and games that just blindly follow tropes of other unimaginative fiction and games, not often.

In other fiction, and games that don't just blindly follow tropes, more often.

In fact, protagonists (and even great heroes) making mistakes, errors of judgement and morality, and misusing violence, are core features of many works of great classic literature, even medieval stories (e.g. Parzival) and even ancient myths (e.g. Oedipus, Achilles, Agamemnon, etc etc.), all the way up through more modern and even current events.

Taking seriously the natural consequences of mis-use of violence, arrogance, pride and hubris, are core themes in much good and great fiction.

Not taking such things seriously and just hand-waving that the hero can be a violent weapon-waving asshole without consequences for no good reason, are hallmarks of lazy derivative nonsense.

That being said, we all know that not one player in a hundred will concede that his character's actions or motives -- however screwy -- are unjustified. Rifle Guy in Panzerkraken's OP came as close as anyone ever does. But even with that, "going into Shadowrun mode" sets forth the premise that there's a milieu in which such responses are not merely justified, but standard.

GM's who enable PCs' screwy motives excessively may be enabling and encouraging that sort of behavior.

That said, there are some settings where yes, brandishing weapons and refusing to be disarmed could be appropriate. OP wrote this was not one of them. But yeah, it may be a case of the player coming in with the wrong expectations, in which case the GM could explain that and let the player know what the PC would know about the setting, and then ask what the PC really does.