Dark Side Conundrum

[ifurin]

[Grimace]

I'm in full agreement with what garhkal has said. Dish out the DSPs even for Non-FS, and when they fail the D6 roll, take their character away and use it as a bad guy. Just because the character can't use the Force doesn't mean they can't be a nasty bad guy. Take a look at Boba Fett. Was he a Force User? Was he a Jedi gone bad? No! He was just a bad guy who was considered a fairly bad mamma-jamma.

Throwing things at characters that have no real bearing on the actual story because the player is playing a character disruptively doesn't accomplish anything worthwhile other than demonstrating that the GM is metagaming the worst.

There's nothing in the rules that says you can't take away a non-FS character and use it for a bad guy if it "falls" to the Dark Side by getting too many DSPs. In fact, taking away the character is the perfect way to put an end to the antics of a potentially disruptive player (or simply the character they're running). When the player goes to make another character, the GM should make certain he or she isn't making a character that's going to be problematic again. If the player insists on making such a character, then you can determine if you want said player in the group.

There should most certainly be some sort of constraints for non-FS characters so that the players just don't run around doing whatever they darn well please.

As far as killing helpless individuals....masque, you basically supported garhkal's own post about whether the character should have gotten a DSP. The Gamorrean in question was contained. I believe the term was "not a threat" and the Con Man started shooting the Gamorrean until he was incapacitated. THEN, after shooting an unarmed, non-threat Gamorrean, the Con Man delivers the killing blow with a vibroblade to an unconcious and incapacitated Gamorrean. How is the Gamorrean NOT a helpless individual? There was no "sneak attack". By your own definition (ie. knocked out, tied up, etc.) the Gamorrean was in all ways a helpless individual.

So, yes, as a GM, you should be able to take and tear up a character sheet for a player that's being disruptive, but the facet of allowing the game to account for the negative and dark behind shouldn't be discounted either. If anything, the DSPs and character removal should be a good indicator as to when a player is falling into a rut or is just heading towards being an abusive player.

[Karae]

[Karae]

[Jamfke]

I always assumed metagaming was having a character perform actions based on knowledge that the character wouldn't have "in game", like a player knowing that another character has a secret item stashed in a secure location on their person and then having their character pick their pockets in the exact spot (along those lines anyway). A GM has to adjust the actions of an NPC after the player reveals his or her intentions as if it were just sprung on them. The only thing I think a GM can do to be considered metagaming is to give the NPCs something to counter any special moves or abilities/equipment the PCs have ahead of time. This is not metagaming if the characters are known to possess such things ahead of time.

Just my 2 creds...
_________________
Check out some of my games at DriveThruRPG!
Role Players Direct

[masque]

I missed the unconscious part, so I agree, the action was DSP worthy, although I stand by my assessment that DSPs as a disciplinary method for non-FS characters are largely pointless.

However, I don't see anything having to do with metagaming in what I said about dealing with disruptive players. What I'm talking about is simply rewarding a player for his actions. If a character runs around causing trouble, likely trouble is going to come looking for him. I simply apply that principle. That's cause and effect, not metagaming. If a player is being a jerk, independent of what his character is doing, I get rid of him. That's not metagaming, either, that's making sure that the game remains fun for those who aren't being jerks.
_________________
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.

[garhkal]

[Grimace]

Metagaming from a GMs perspective is as follows:

Con Man kills Gamorrean while said dead individual is confined in a cell where only the PCs know about it. If GM then has NPCs in the game suddenly know, and act upon the information that the Con Man is a bad guy because of what he's done, that would be considered metagaming. The GM is basically having NPCs act upon something that they would have no reasonable knowledge of.

Now if the Con Man did that in the middle of a crowded cantina, I could see word getting out. But if he does it on their own ship, or in a building where only the PCs are, then no one else would reasonably know about the event and therefore no NPC should ever treat the Con Man differently.

Another example of metagaming is as follows:

Group is planning on how to get into a Crime Lord's hideout, and came up with the perfect plan, one that the GM hadn't thought of. They decide to use their Slicer to hack the security system video surveillence and sneak in while the Slicer is still showing empty hallways. Now the Slicer makes all of his rolls and by all rights, the PCs should get in without a problem. If the GM magically has some of the Crime Lord's thugs show up, blasters blazing when there was no possible way for the thugs to know about the PC's location, then that would be metagaming as well.

If the GM creates a bad guy, with all of the bad guy's things, and the bad guy meets the PCs and fights them to a stand still, then the PCs decide to pick up some things to contend with the bad guy, if the GM then immediately ALTERS the bad guy so that he cannot be defeated by said items, that is metagaming. Now, if they PCs did it in a manner that was easy to figure out, say walking to a store and purchasing a particular weapon, I could see the bad guy maybe learning about it. But if they went to some street skiff and purchased an illegal, untraceable weapon with no way of any traces pointing back to the PCs, then the bad guy should have no clue the PCs got the item and therefore should not have an automatic defense against that item.

A GM having to improv something because the players pull a fast one on him isn't metagaming...it's thinking on your feet. But coming up with something for the specific purpose of "sticking it to the players" IS metagaming on the GMs part.

Don't get me wrong, though, if you have to deal with a disruptive PLAYER by talking to him and telling him to knock it off, then that's something the GM has to do. That has nothing to do with metagaming...that's simply keeping the group cohesive. But using the game to punish a player, by having the game pick on his/her character with information the NPCs should not know about...that's metagaming.

[Esoomian]

I have to admit on one occasion (in a non D6 situation) I did give a up the hitpoints of a badguy in the middle of a cinematic encounter because the PCs killed him in a single blow.

Probably counts as metagaming but in my mind I consider it failing to account for the PCs full potential in the planning stages of the game.

These days I tend to let what happens happen which has led to insignificant encounters becoming heroic and supposedly cinematic encounters becoming trivial.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.

Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view.

[Karae]

[masque]

[garhkal]

[Expendable Hero]

First I'll give my view on dealing with players that have dark side points. I never really liked the overt style of dealing with characters with them. Instead I encouraged them out of game as if I was the devil on there shoulder. For example. It's a pity that you're out of force points....ohh well lets hope that you haven't gotten yourself in over your head.....of course there is a way you could be certain to survive... Its a simple role to call on the dark side and you get a free force point to use in this round. Plus you would get another die on all of your force rolls in the combat from the dark side point. Or simply making sure they remember that they can add there dark side points in dice to rolls. In fact I let people start with one or two dark side points to begin with because then they have to really watch out. Also as the players get DSP you can scale back on letting them know if an action is DSP worthy before they do it more. I find this style of handling PCs and there fall to the dark side has a much higher rate of conversion and I feel that a big part of playing a jedi campaign is dealing with the lure power you get in that struggle.
Second I only give DSP to non force users if they use a force point when they commit evil. Using a FP is a representation of a normal char taping into the force on a greater level than they normally would.
As far as keeping the other players in line I use a combination effect. The first is that I use reasonable consequences to the actions that the players do. If they double cross a crime lord then hell be out looking for them. If they rob a bank then there will be an investigation. You just have to make sure it appropriate to the place and what they did. Killing someone in a bar on corellia is going to get you in a lot deeper trouble than killing someone in Mos Eisly. Unless the person you kill is fairly important to someone.

[Reyus Graven]

[Expendable Hero]

All hail the computer