bigbadron
 moderator, 15331 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 16:44
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
swordchucks:
Kioma:
when I post something - anything - in a game I assume that the GM/s will look at it.

The rule isn't quite as pointed at that.
Actually it is as pointed as that.  RpoL expects every GM in a game to be aware of it's content.  That means reading everything, including the PMs - we will not accept "I didn't read that thread" as a valid reason for being unaware of a thread' s content.
bigbadron
 moderator, 15333 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 17:31
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Example: Only the involved players and the GM are able to read a private thread, so who reports breaches of the TOU in a private thread to the GM?  If we spot a couple of people playing out the rape of a minor in a PM then we are going to be asking why they've been allowed to do it.

"Sorry, it's a private thread between two players that I trust, so I didn't read it." will probably earn a site ban, just like theirs.
swordchucks
 member, 1373 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 18:32
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
bigbadron:
Actually it is as pointed as that.

When I went looking, I had a really, really hard time finding this rule.  There are some mentions of that kind of policy for adult games in a few posts, but it took about half an hour of going through every item in Help and FAQs to finally find a statement to that effect that it applies to all games.  The only mention I found was in the FAQ for Mature games under a section on Adult content in PMs.

If this is meant to be a core rule, I really think it should be spelled out more clearly in the basic areas of the rules.  Unless I missed it there, somewhere, of course.

EDIT: Please don't misconstrue the above as opposition to the rule.  As long as the enforcement is reasonable, it's probably fine.

This message was last edited by the user at 18:37, Thu 20 Apr.

gladiusdei
 member, 532 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 18:36
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
I feel like I've seen that rule repeated again and again in the community chat and threads like this. So it isn't exactly a hidden thing.

GMs are personally responsible for everything in their games, which is also why they are the only authority on who plays in them, and what decisions they make.  Every bit of the game is their responsibility.
Lxndr
 member, 144 posts
 Game Designer
 Master Hypnotist
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 18:49
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
It's things like this that make me want to implement something like the X-Card in my games.

http://tinyurl.com/x-card-rpg
bigbadron
 moderator, 15334 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 18:53
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
In reply to swordchucks (msg # 48):

There's also a very clear post about GM responsibilities in "RPoL Announcements".
Kioma
 member, 23 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:02
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
It seems sensible to me that GMs are responsible for everything in the game - GMs are the only ones (apart from mods, obviously) who can permanently delete any post or kick any player.  You can't really expect to wield near-supreme* executive power in a game without taking on a similar amount of responsibility for that game.

Not everybody feels the same way, that's clear, but I figure that's the way it should be.

I dunno.  Maybe I'm a bit of an idealist in some ways but I figure it's realism talking.

* = 'Near-supreme' because the game contents are still bound by the TOU, of course.
MalaeDezeld
 member, 8 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:20
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
In reply to bigbadron (msg # 51):

The post is clear, but it is lost on the second page... I found it because you mentioned it, I wouldn't have seen it otherwise. I feel that it should also be somewhere more evident, like the ToU or when creating a new game.
swordchucks
 member, 1374 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:33
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
bigbadron:
There's also a very clear post about GM responsibilities in "RPoL Announcements".

Do you mean the post titled "Required Reading for those who GM or PLAY in Adult Games"?  Because that's the item I was referring to earlier as applying explicitly to adult games.  Would someone that's only running general or mature games expect to be held to rules in a post that's, from its very title, targeted at players of adult games?  The fact that most of that post is clearly outdated makes it (all of the age stuff is overridden in the FAQ)... less likely to be viewed as a go-to source for the current rules.

From a technical aspect, a rule like this worries me because it's quite possible to miss a PM here and there due to the way they're ordered by recipient.  From a practical standpoint, I'm very, very unlikely to break it as the kind of forbidden PM thread mentioned here is likely to be active enough that I'd certainly peek in on it to see what was up.

@gladiusdei

I get what you're saying, but a lot of people don't read community chat or the other forums.  I've gone years without reading a thread in community chat before.  If there's a rule that's going to affect me, I should be able to find it in the Policy section of Help at the very least.



Again, I'm not saying it's a bad rule, but it's easy not to know it.  Rules that are easy not to know are easy to break without knowing it.  All I'm suggesting is that it get made more clear in the Policy or ToU section (technically, it's not the ToU but the Adult Games Policy that's getten broken - which is in itself not an Adult Games Policy but an Adult/Restricted Content Policy since it applies to games that aren't Adult games).
swordchucks
 member, 1375 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:38
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
MalaeDezeld:
The post is clear

Woah, that thread is clear (though some explicit mentions of PM threads would be welcome to bulk it out a bit).  It's just... lost on the second page... and from nine years ago.  That might be asking a bit much for new GMs to become aware of it.  It's clearly asking too much for my memory to have retained solid knowledge of it nine years later.
bigbadron
 moderator, 15335 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:43
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
I was talking about the one entitled "Responsibilities of GM status."
bigbadron
 moderator, 15336 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 19:48
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
And now it's on the first page
Azraile
 member, 589 posts
 AIM: Azraile - Dislexic
 Dont take my text as mean
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 21:33
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Considering some people only read the first post i'll fix that too... but just to be clear:

I'm talking about the fact that multiple times in my games I see the same thing. Some one takes something IC personally OOC when it's not something personal... but they don't know that because they don't talk to the person and refuse to listen to me saying it's not the case this guy/girl is just being a bully (for lack of more valger ways of describing them being alowed in a public form). So with out talking to anyone in the game they demand I do something about it or quit with out any willingness to talk to or acknowledge the other person.

They do not even make an attempt to question or discuss the IC actions with anyone, just exspect I do something about it.

They instead just try and get me to kick them out of the game or force them ICly to act in a way that makes the person happier OOCly.

There not taking IC conflict and escelating it into OOC.

They are taking IC conflict and taking it strait to the GM with demands.

Last one did say something OOCly to try and resolve things, but even that was just them complaing that there char didn't do anything to deserve to be talked to the way they where and it was explained the circumstances as to why the char was acting the way they did. But rather than discuss it, they escilated directly to me expecting me to fix it with out even talking about it in a situation where people where quite open to discussion.

People need to at the least TRY and consolidate things OOCly....

There not looking for that nor are they looking for me to act as a mediator, there just expecting me to fix things so they will like it more.

I am happy to mediate a problem, but this is more of running to mom and demanding "there not playing the way I like do something!" or the sorta "tell so and so this because i'm not talking to them." kinda thing....

I'm just saying instead of going directly to me, TRY talking about it.

And if I don't do exactly what you ask don't go storming out of the game blaming everyone else because you refuse to talk about something. Especialy when everyone there is open to discussion and willing to work something out.
SunRuanEr
 member, 43 posts
Thu 20 Apr 2017
at 23:09
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Azraile:
Last one did say something OOCly to try and resolve things, but even that was just them complaing that there char didn't do anything to deserve to be talked to the way they where and it was explained the circumstances as to why the char was acting the way they did. But rather than discuss it, they escilated directly to me expecting me to fix it with out even talking about it in a situation where people where quite open to discussion.

See, this is precisely the sort of thing that drives me nuts.

Look, I understand that sometimes you can't react to everything in an IC post in an IC fashion (whitetext inner thoughts being the prime culprit, here, because another PC cannot react to those without becoming a metagamer) - but by jove, when a PC talks to your PC in a way that you think is unfair (ICly), then have your PC respond to that and be all 'yo, I don't deserve that' and then get some RP going that delves into the issue and perhaps explains it/resolves it ICly.

Because, see, the problem with the example that you cite (and the prime reason that I prefer IC things to be handled ICly, and not OOC) is that Player 1 complained about Player 2 OOCly and received an OOC explanation that 1)doesn't help Player 1's character IC, and 2)provides them with metagame knowledge (the motivations for why Player 2's character acted the way it did) that they wouldn't have otherwise had.

Some players are really good about keeping their IC and OOC knowledge distinct, but the majority aren't, and in my experience it's simply better to never, ever have an OOC discussion about the whys of a PC's actions when it could have been had ICly. [Edit: Even if its not going to wind up used as metagame knowledge, it still tends to rob the game of a scene/conversation that could have actually been had that will be rendered moot by it having taken place OOC.]

Other peoples' mileage obviously varies.

This message was last edited by the user at 23:13, Thu 20 Apr.

MalaeDezeld
 member, 9 posts
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 01:32
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Azraile:
this is more of running to mom and demanding "there not playing the way I like do something!"


And why wouldn't they run to you (mom) if you are there? You can make something in the fiction to help them, edit a post, kick someone out.

At the same time, I think that the complain is legit. If player A want a game of romance, and player B want to play a bully, A and B shouldn't be in the same game. When the conflict happen, the player need to know where you stand, because if you pick the other option, they won't have fun in your game. And with 5,266 games on rpol, they could probably find one more pleasing to them.
tsukoyomi
 member, 84 posts
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 02:38
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
The OOC knowledge might give you metagame knowledge, but frankly, it's better to air out things, for everyone to be aware of the kind of themes that are going to be involved. Because sometimes, they're seriously not what you want.

You can metagame for good. If one character is an apple pie because he got alcoholism problems, and this aspect and the topics it brings up makes you uncomfortable, talking it OOC can let you find excuses for your character to not be around when the topic is brought up so you can skip reading on the subject, or it can be channeled in a way that doesn't bother you.

Sure, you can make your character suddenly develop an aversion to alcoholism the moment it's actually brought up instead of just the side effects in response; rage, be preachy, walk out of the room or whatever, but without the acompanying OOC knowledge you most likely come off as an apple pie... The kind of characterization other players would go 'what the hell dude?' at you in OOC or to the GM because it came out of nowhere and it bothers them.

There are countless minor and major things that could seriously rub a player the wrong way, many of them are not malicious and the person that brought it up would not even suspect that it would affect another player that way. Intercharacter conflict is good, interplayer conflict is better off being cut off in the bud.

This message was last edited by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 14:27, Fri 21 Apr.

Azraile
 member, 592 posts
 AIM: Azraile - Dislexic
 Dont take my text as mean
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 03:29
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
tsukoyomi:
You can metagame for good. If one character is an apple pie because he got alcoholism problems, and this aspect and the topics it brings up makes you uncomfortable, talking it OOC can let you find excuses for your character to not be around when the topic is brought up so you can skip reading on the subject, or it can be channeled in a way that doesn't bother you.


Exactly, it's the GM's job to make sure EVERYONE has a good time. So it erks me a bit when people won't even try and work something out and just expect me to fix it so they are the one having fun regardless of everyone else.

I liked all but one of the players that did this too, but I can't order other players around when no one is doing anything wrong.

Well I take that back the most resent did have the other player, in my eye, take things a little to far. But I resolved it with them, the player that left wouldn't talk to them to try and resolve it and they didn't listen to anything I said to try and do so.

All three also tried to use "I'm quiting, bye" to try and get me to do something.... I am like, well ok but you should least try and talk this through before you just walk off.

And who knows how many people in games arn't happy about something and just leave with out saying anything.

I just wish people would try and talk there problems over.

This message was last edited by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 14:29, Fri 21 Apr.

facemaker329
 member, 6915 posts
 Gaming for over 30
 years, and counting!
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 06:13
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Well, see...my take on your example is that the player in question had already made up his (her?) mind to take offense at what was said.  And, at that point, trying to discuss it between players isn't going to do any good. The player has already jumped past the 'let's talk about this' stage.  The fact that said player came to you as GM, and then refused to accept your explanation, says a lot about that player...and what it's saying isn't good.

The problem isn't the method of conflict resolution...the problem is that the player has already rejected any option for resolution short of the one he decided on, probably immediately and without any real consideration.  With players like that, it doesn't matter how they 'try' to deal with the issue, it's not going to work...they've decided on the virtual equivalent of wanting a pound of flesh, and nothing less will appease them.  And they probably know, good and well, that they won't get it by talking to the other player, so they appeal directly to you.  When you present an argument that nullifies their desire, they refuse to accept it.

I fail to see how going directly to the other player is in any way going to make this problem less severe...and I see a lot of options for it exploding spectacularly in everyone's face.

In a perfect world, yes...we could all step aside with the person who annoyed/offended/insulted us and say, "Hey, you know, I really felt that was inappropriate and could have been done better," and they would say, "Oh, I didn't realize my words/actions came across so antagonistic.  That was not my intent, here's why I did it that way and hopefully understanding that will clear up any misunderstandings."  It's not a perfect world...and, sadly, in that regard, the internet is considerably less perfect, in general.
Kioma
 member, 24 posts
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 08:36
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Azraile:
There not taking IC conflict and escelating it into OOC.

They are taking IC conflict and taking it strait to the GM with demands.

I'm still not clear on how this is a bad thing.

If they're coming straight to the GM with demands, instead of escalating conflict with the other player (whether in PMs or in the OOC chat), then the GM has an immediate chance to defuse the situation and resolve the matter peacefully.  They can demand all they want, but if they're taking those demands to the GM rather than to the other player (or, far worse, in the OOC chat - especially if they're the kind of toxic, noxious player who will attempt to turn players against each other and act the innocent all the while), then the GM can privately say, 'This is not the huge drama you think it is.'  How diplomatically a GM is going to say that will depend on the individual, obviously.

Yes, a player bringing grievances to you the GM directly might (depending on the circumstances) be frustrating, but that's part and parcel of the whole GM gig.

If a player is going to ignore the GM on interpersonal conflicts or any other matter, as facemaker329 wisely points out, that's their damage.  You can't do a thing about that and directing their ire away from yourself and toward the other player, who has no way of properly defending themselves if things get too heated other than turning to the GM or leaving the game... that doesn't seem ideal.

We do not live in a perfect world.  But even if we did, the GM would still be responsible for what happens in their game - and that includes the if-and-how interpersonal conflicts are resolved.
Azraile
 member, 593 posts
 AIM: Azraile - Dislexic
 Dont take my text as mean
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 10:45
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
I'm not saying they should redirect there ire, I say they should give discussion a chance first.

Skipping right past talking about it and going to the top is not the way to handle a problem.

You can't escalate a conflict before even seeing if there is one.

I have to agree though if a player can't separate IC and OOC feelings they don't need to be playing.
willvr
 member, 1041 posts
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 11:47
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
The point is though that discussion can often lead to the escalation you're trying to avoid; especially in a PbP format. You 'talk' to the other player, and having no idea of their background, their sensitivities, it can lead to an explosion. I'd make more allowances for just talking to someone if you're talking about a group that is really an offline group who due to current circumstances have had to go online; but you're talking about a group of strangers, who have no idea of what makes each other tick.

It -can- work, but by going to the GM, the likelihood is greater. Not all RPers, in fact I'd even suggest quite a low proportion, are good at putting their points in a tactful manner. But if when the GM says something they react badly, then you know there's an issue of some sort (even if it's just 'this player shouldn't be gaming with this GM). But when you react badly to another player, there was not necessarily an issue to begin with though there certainly is now.
swordchucks
 member, 1379 posts
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 14:00
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Azraile:
I can't order other players around when no one is doing anything wrong.

You're kind of being vague on this, but as the GM you certainly can order the players around.  It's perfectly fine that if Carl has a problem with the way Rob's acting for you to ask Rob to tone it down a little because it's making Carl uncomfortable.  In fact, if someone were making me uncomfortable in a game, that's exactly what I would expect you to do!

The thing is, you don't know your players deeply.  You don't know the fully story on why something is upsetting them.  You don't know whether or not it's something they want to talk out or deal with at all.  There are certain topics that I'd go straight to the GM and request that it be retconned out or I'll leave.  Granted, they're all borderline Content Restriction violations, but they exist.

More mildly, if it's not what the game was supposed to be about, why are you, as the GM, fostering that conflict?  I'm a pretty conflict-averse person, and my characters tend to be the same.  If something goes beyond my threshold for enjoyment, I'll come to you as the GM and ask you to fix it.  When you start saying "well, Bob wants to have a big inter-character conflict with you, you have to talk it out with Bob", that's my cue to go.  I'm not doing that.  I signed up to fight aliens (or whatever), not to engage in a deep dive of Bob's personal issues with me.

Alternately, I've had characters walk out of games before because of other characters.  My cleric shows up at the "meet the party" session only to find out one of the other PCs is a sloppy drunk that's offensive and abusive to her?  There's the door over there and other adventures beckon.  If I'm playing a character and one of the other PCs decides to lay into me for no reason I can discern, my character may well leave.  Or shoot them in the face.  Is that better than going to the GM and asking for a resolution?  It certainly makes the game more exciting for the 2-3 posts that it lasts past that.
Gaffer
 member, 1456 posts
 Ocoee FL
 40 yrs of RPGs
Fri 21 Apr 2017
at 14:30
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Azraile:
Exactly, it's the GM's job to make sure EVERYONE has a good time.

Oh, no. no no no no...

When I'm the GM, it isn't all my responsibility to make people enjoy things. EVERYONE has to work to make the story fun and exciting and interesting. We're all in this thing together.

facemaker:
...my take on your example is that the player in question had already made up his (her?) mind to take offense at what was said.

I think this exactly. When that player came to you, she/he was already out the door and just looking to create some trouble on the way. A discussion with the other player would just have been argumentative and angry and hurt and nothing the other player said would have done anything but fan the flames. You had zero chance of a positive resolution here.

That said, the GM can have a positive influence in some cases, especially where there's a legitimate beef or misunderstanding. But it's not easy.
facemaker329
 member, 6919 posts
 Gaming for over 30
 years, and counting!
Sat 22 Apr 2017
at 07:36
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
Yeah...you're saying "Try discussion first," but the inciting example you're presenting has a player who doesn't even want to discuss it with YOU, and you're not the one who triggered the incident.  Yes, some players can settle their own issues...but I wouldn't ever make that the default for everyone, because some people have all the subtlety and diplomacy of a block of C4, and can be nearly as destructive when triggered.  Better to have a buffer in place (the GM), who can head such things off before they become catastrophic.  Not everyone needs it...but if you're going to make a 'one size fits all' approach to those situations, you don't want it to be the one with the highest likelihood of blowing up in your face.  And, let's face it...if you, as GM, don't want to referee those arguments, you can always listen to the complaint and then tell them to wirk it out themselves.  But you SHOULD know about it, because it can impact your game heavily, and it's better to hear about it before things go nuclear, rather than after it's all blown up and you're trying to find a way to clean up the fallout.
Alex Vriairu
 member, 406 posts
Sat 22 Apr 2017
at 19:59
Re: If you have a problem with IC actions of players....
As a player if i have a problem with another player and for some reason feel like I can't talk to them without making it worse (I'm one of those people Facemaker so nicely put has the diplomatic equivalent to a truck of C4...) then you can bet it goes to the GM First, and only.  Because I know if I handle it myself, it will take out half a city block.