FenrisLoki
 member, 6 posts
 What even is this?
 Way too short to write...
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 08:35
Is this Godmodding?
Hey y'all. So something's bothering me and I'd like to get some feedback in case I'm wildly off base. I've been accused of godmodding twice and I want to ask what people think, whether I'm in the wrong. Would people mind looking at my examples and saying if there was godmodding?

For reference, I'm pretty sure godmodding is literally describing how another character responds or is affected. For example: "Pikachu dodges and shoots a lightning bolt, knocking Charizard back," instead of "Pikachu dodges and shoots a lightning bolt at Charizard's back." The latter leaves the other players open to say what happens, the former doesn't and is godmodding. At least, that's what Google told me.

Example 1: During a scene, another player announces they're looking around my store, so I ask her to "please be careful". She accused me of godmodding by implying she wasn't being careful. GM supported me and she left the game, but she had apparently been a problem player for a while by that point.

Example 2: Another character goes insane for IC reasons and attacks mine with an axe, narrating both the attack and it's effects, specifically my character's mutilation. The GM fully supported this. I cry foul because this is not supported by the rules of the game and losing one's nuts is something I object to strongly. Eventually it's retconned, but my accusations of godmodding aren't resolved and eventually I leave the game.

Example 3: My character had an ethical disagreement with another character IC, but I reached out to the other player OOC to suggest some ways our characters can come to some sort of compromise to progress the RP. One suggestion was that, if no compromise could be found, then my character would try to "redeem" the other into seeing the light through dialogue. The GM, apparently independently, accused me of issuing an ultimatum because of the threat(?) of one character seeking another's redemption, and of godmodding because trying to change another character by talking about something is the most serious kind of godmodding (???). This situation is still in progress but I think it's likely I'll leave the game because that kind of GM doesn't seem good.

This message was last edited by the user at 08:41, Mon 12 Nov 2018.

aguy777
 member, 297 posts
 Join Date:
 Thu, 28 Nov, 2013
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 08:52
Is this Godmodding?
Others may view these differently, but here's my opinions:

Example one is not godmodding. It's just your character asking another to be careful. You're not controlling her actions, just expressing worry about your store's merchandise.

Example two is godmodding. Chopping parts off of people should generally be cleared with them first. I know I'd like a say if my character was about to lose an arm for something outside of dice rolls.

Example three is not godmodding. It's just planning how two characters will get around an irreconcilable difference. Making it your character's goal to try and persuade another to accept your view point can provide excellent RP interactions, assuming it's cleared with the other player first.
acera
 member, 148 posts
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 08:59
Is this Godmodding?
Youíre not in the wrong. My understanding is that the term comes from ďgod modeĒ in video games because it refers to the act of taking control over someone elseís character actions (like an all powerful god), and thatís been my understanding for as long as Iíve been role playing.

Examples 1 and 3 are definitely not god moding the way I see it.

I would personally consider example 2 godmoding, but itís the GMs game, so if they chose to ignore game rules and make their own up, you are unfortunately on their turf. (Not that I personally agree with it- I would have been out of that game right then and there).
facemaker329
 member, 7064 posts
 Gaming for over 30
 years, and counting!
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 09:01
Is this Godmodding?
Well, in my book, for what it's worth...

#1--Definitely not.  A shopkeeper with a lot of fragile stock would likely say something like 'be careful' to EVERY patron who came in the door, regardless of how careful or careless they may have been intending to be.

#2--Yes.  When one player dictates actions, reactions, emotional responses, etc for another player (or for NPCs, unless the GM has given you permission to write in the NPC responses), that's godmodding.  It didn't even have to be what kind of damage he did...the fact that he stated the attack was successful without any input from you or the GM is, in my book, overstepping his bounds.  Different GMs may interpret it differently, but that's my take on it.

#3--I'm inclined to say no, but I feel like I don't know enough about the situation to take a definitive position on it.  If you and the other player were working it out OOC, I don't think the GM was right to step in...but I don't know if the other player felt like you were 'pushing' too hard and requested the GM intercede, which totally changes that dynamic.  That said, I feel like you weren't declaring any specific results...you stated what your character was going to do, and left it up to the other player/the GM to resolve the results.

Stuff like this is why freeform gets a bad reputation...(and I say that as a guy who's in a few freeform games...)
icosahedron152
 member, 920 posts
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 10:22
Is this Godmodding?
I'm with you and the rest of the commenters, Fenris. There are some nutters out there, but it's not us. :)
donsr
 member, 1447 posts
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 12:56
Is this Godmodding?
 indeed...   In my games I use the term  'Semi-Freeform'..because  my game  had Boundaries  and   a handful of  rules.

  we may have some folks  that seem to 'pop up' is places  from time to time, But  not really effecting the   flow of the RP.

 but, there  has been times  I had to PM a Player and say " you know you can't do that".. and have the post edited.
Utsukushi
 member, 1465 posts
 I should really stay out
 of this, I know...but...
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 16:16
Is this Godmodding?
Honestly, your examples all seem pretty clear - to the point that I think it's worth remembering that all you can really give us is your own perception of what happened, where of course you were right.  Not saying you're not right, just that if you're really looking for advice, that's worth keeping in mind.  I see it on things like Facebook and G+ a lot, where somebody comes in saying, "Hey, am I crazy here?" and describes a situation in which they are clearly not the crazy one, and sure enough they get a bunch of replies assuring them that the other person was crazy.  And having, on occasion, been the one who apparently was crazy in that scenario, I can say that.. well, OK, sometimes I probably was, but usually, what they described wasn't what I experienced, like, at all, and if I'd gone out and described my side, I'd have gotten the same reassurances from the same people.

Anyway, in the end I agree with Facemaker.  Your first and second examples seem simple enough that it's probably not that and your general sense of how godmodding* works seems pretty well in line with the majority, but somebody saw it differently and it might be worth seeing if you can figure out why.

The third feels fuzzy to me - complicated enough that it's quite possible the other player and/or GM are really experiencing it differently than you are.  I'm not sure a bunch of people here telling you you're right is helpful (to you, particularly, let alone to the situation) when we don't know anything about what's happening from the other people's perspectives.


*- Blah. That word bothers me on several levels.  I'm all for verbification, but this is not one of our best examples of it.  It's just awkward.
PaulK
 member, 228 posts
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 17:03
Is this Godmodding?
In reply to FenrisLoki (msg # 1):

My own thoughts, based on your descriptions.

1) this example seems to be a misreading of your intent.  It happens. Itíd be an easier sell if you had a lot of obviously fragile stock, or a record of automatically saying it in the past.  Without a really clear justification you can point to it could be hard to clear up.  Then again, since I donít know the full situation I canít say for certain that the player and GM didnít have some justification themselves - but it doesnít seem that likely.

2) this sounds off.  I really canít see any defence unless there are substantial errors or omissions in your description.

3)  if I understand correctly if you didnít get an agreement you were going to continue arguing ad infinitum?  If so, I can understand that the others might not have liked it.  Without more details I wouldnít like to assign blame, but I donít see how endless dialogue would progress anything.
horus
 member, 600 posts
 Wayfarer of the
 Western Wastes
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 17:32
Is this Godmodding?
I'm a bit old-school, so I've heard this behavior (controlling the outcomes, actions, or dialogue of a player one does not own) referred to as twinking, but that's just a difference in terminology, and probably comes from MUD and MUSH environments if I'm remembering correctly.

Yeah:

1. No, you weren't putting words in the other character's mouth, you weren't controlling that character's actions in a puppet-on-a-string sense, and you didn't specify an outcome for that character, either.

2. Yeah, that seems kinda high and outside.  Were the descriptions rules-driven, as in a "called shot", compel, or critical hit of some kind?  That might make this more acceptable, depending on the game system.

3. No, but as PaulK said, that continual back-and-forth may have been what the GM was trying to avoid.

People are people, and not one of us is perfect.  Language, especially, is a skill and an art, and folks enter games with different levels of skill and experience in using language.  A little slack now and then is a good thing in our dealings with others.
FenrisLoki
 member, 7 posts
 What even is this?
 Way too short to write...
Mon 12 Nov 2018
at 19:16
Is this Godmodding?
Thanks for your answers, all.

Yeah, of course this is all based on my perspective - don't have any others- so it's entirely possible my perceptions are biased, especially given that I'm heavily summarizing. But if I'm not being given credit for my intent, I don't see why I should try too hard to give others credit, so it's a wash.

Just to clarify, situation 1 was during my character's introduction into an ongoing game, but according to veterans the other person had been demonstrably antagonistic and the GM was considering banning by then anyway. So I think it's pretty likely she was looking for a reason to be offended.

Situation 2 was based in D&D3.5, and for those of you that know about it will agree that mutilation (castration in this case) as part of a non-critical hit isn't supported by any rules, which basically serve as the fundamental social contract of the game. The attack roll on the surprise attack was a legit hit, though. The offending player ran the plan by the DM, but not by me.

Situation 3, yes maybe the GM wanted the discussion to stop, but that's not what he said: he used the term godmodding, so thats what I wanted to evaluate. Side note: would it have been acceptable to y'all if the GM had actually jumped into a conversation in order to say something like "change topic immediately and don't bring it up again because this is unproductive"? I think so. Because what he said was more along the lines of "this looks like it's headed for PvP, and it's your fault FenrisLoki, so watch your back".

When confronted with madness, confirmation that you're sane is actually pretty valuable.
horus
 member, 604 posts
 Wayfarer of the
 Western Wastes
Tue 13 Nov 2018
at 01:33
Is this Godmodding?
In reply to FenrisLoki (msg # 10):

quote:
Situation 2 was based in D&D3.5, and for those of you that know about it will agree that mutilation (castration in this case) as part of a non-critical hit isn't supported by any rules, which basically serve as the fundamental social contract of the game. The attack roll on the surprise attack was a legit hit, though. The offending player ran the plan by the DM, but not by me.


Nice clarification on scenario 2.  Yeah, that is kinda high and outside for a non-crit.  The DM in this case was under no obligation to discuss it with you first, but it still seems kinda backhanded.  Even with surprise, unless it's a thief's back-stab, this sounds like something done on-the-fly without much thought as to the actual combat mechanics involved.


In scenario 3, that comment about "so watch your back" is kinda messed up.  PvP happens rarely, but more especially between characters of opposing alignments or affiliations.

The best thing a DM can do is step back, be as neutral and proper with the rules as possible, and let it shake itself out.  This DM basically put you on notice that he or she was *pomegranated* at you and had no intent to be neutral about it.  Nobody should act like it's the end of the world (unless, of course, your characters are of Ragnarok-inducing levels...)

quote:
When confronted with madness, confirmation that you're sane is actually pretty valuable.


Meh.  Sanity is somewhat overrated - I'll take the right kind of crazy any old day.  That said, I get what you mean.

This message was last edited by the user at 01:43, Tue 13 Nov 2018.

DarkLightHitomi
 member, 1425 posts
Tue 13 Nov 2018
at 08:42
Is this Godmodding?
Having read just the opening post so far,

1. Totally not godmodding. It was a reasonable in character statement that said nothing at all about the other player or character.

2. The lack of rules support means nothing to me here, but I would never let this sort of thing be a simple direct choice of the player. Sure, I'd let the player attempt a called shot, at major penalties for that choice of target. Of course, that kind of theming woukd have been hashed out as acceptable or not before starting the campaign.

3. Discussing things ooc is never godmodding, and is generally a good way to resolve issues. Quite honestly, I don't even see a reason for a gm to have an issue unless they have built an upcoming plot point that would be ruined and aren't sure about how to adjust if you succeed. Though, I guess it is possible that your phrasing may have been seen by the gm as you trying to bully the other player into doing it your way. Not really godmodding but certainly something to avoid, and text as a medium is much much harder to understand the tone of a statement.
Alex Vriairu
 member, 435 posts
Thu 15 Nov 2018
at 13:22
Is this Godmodding?
All I have to say is two is totally godmoding to me, at best what I would allow and/or do is narrate my attempt, and what I would do in case said attempt succeeds, until I run out of what I consider a reasonable amount of actions, but at no point would I assume ANY one of those in the chain actually works as intended.

But especially in a fight, rarely does one just take a single action at a time, fights are fluid and fast, so it seems reasonable and logical to try and narrate the full set of intended actions and wait for the other to find an acceptable counter, rather than do it piece by piece, but that's me.
hegemon
 member, 162 posts
Thu 15 Nov 2018
at 17:18
Is this Godmodding?
I am not going to comment on whether something is Godmodding or not. I do not feel that bringing exact examples is the way to go. It strikes me as a mob court situation.

My only advise would be go to the St of the game and ask why they made or allowed certain actions. Have them explain their thoughts on the situation, and than make a choice if you agree or do not. If, you feel the ST unfairly adjudicated the scene a choice to stay or leave would be yours to make.

I say this not as an attack on the person that started the thread, but I know as an St of games on this site I would be disappointed to see a public discussion of my rulings. This would be doubly so if the player did not address the issue fully with me. Which the player could of done. I guess I am saying there are lots of games on this site, and people's play style or even personalities do not always mesh. If that is the case find another game. Eventually, you will find people that you enjoy playing with.
DarkLightHitomi
 member, 1427 posts
Fri 16 Nov 2018
at 23:13
Is this Godmodding?
You should never be disappointed about a player seeking advice and perspective about your game.

RP is an art, a true art like music or painting, but unlike other arts, RP is interactive. To be the audience for music or paintings, you can enjoy them on your own but other perspectives can do even more, but for RP other perspectives are even more important to the enjoyment of the RP, but in particular, other perspectives help the player understand fundementals of RP.

Just like music has fundemental elements of musical composition that audience members rarely understandm so to does RP, except, because RP is interactive, the audience needs to understand those fundementals to gain the greatest benefit of the RP.

Unfortunately, RP is still in it;s infancy, and there are no professional sources built on centuries of experience like there are with the arts. Worse, most GMs fail to see the potential of RP to be an art on par with the other arts.

Thus, right now, the best way to learn more about RP in general, is to question everything, and discuss it all with as many as possible. We still have a couple centuries to go before RP reaes maturity as a well understood artform.
hegemon
 member, 163 posts
Fri 16 Nov 2018
at 23:42
Is this Godmodding?
In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 15):

I understand what you are trying to say, but I am a believer of taking it directly to the source. Ask the Storyteller their perspective on what has happened. If, you are confused go privately to a circle of experience players. Maybe, they can help with the issue.

My point is that including those that are involved with a possible conflict should almost always be the first step a player takes. Most people are reasonable, and can be talked to. I see no real help in sourcing the table in this manner. I guess it is nice to have strangers say that you are right, but not knowing what happened from the other players and storyteller's view makes me does any thing said here really help.

I do feel bad that the player had these situations happen. My advise is still if their frustration or disappointment in the game prevents from continued enjoyment of the game then quit.  There are many games that are on RPOL, and unfortunately a player will not always like all the games they play.
horus
 member, 607 posts
 Wayfarer of the
 Western Wastes
Sat 17 Nov 2018
at 08:26
Re: Is this Godmodding?
hegemon:
In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 15):

I understand what you are trying to say, but I am a believer of taking it directly to the source.

If I may:  I respect your point of view, however, I'm not sure I agree with it in all cases.

The OP seems to be looking for opinions concerning events that happened to him in play.  If he is earnestly seeking guidance on how to conduct himself (as opposed to validation or justification for attempting to modify the behavior of others), all is well.  It all goes to the OP's motivation.

Just because the OP didn't mention speaking to the folks involved about these situations doesn't mean he didn't do it.  I suppose we could go to the source and ask him, right?

quote:
Ask the Storyteller their perspective on what has happened. If, you are confused go privately to a circle of experience players. Maybe, they can help with the issue.

This may have happened. OP, feel free to confirm or deny, please.

We who have been consulted here are not involved one way or the other in this situation, and so are as close to a "private" impartial group of experienced players and GM/ST/Referee types as the OP is likely to find close to hand.

quote:
My point is that including those that are involved with a possible conflict should almost always be the first step a player takes.

That may not always be possible, but where it is I would generally agree.

quote:
Most people are reasonable, and can be talked to. I see no real help in sourcing the table in this manner. I guess it is nice to have strangers say that you are right, but not knowing what happened from the other players and storyteller's view makes me does any thing said here really help.

In my experience, folks fresh from the field of conflict with the steam still rising off their armor, so to speak, are possibly less reasonable that those same folks when given a chance to reflect for a bit and cool off.  Different strokes for different folks.

The amount of help we who have given our honest opinions can be in this situation depends greatly on what the OP does with those opinions.  Who is to say what good will or will not come of our discourse?

Having impartial "strangers" (some of whom may actually know FenrisLoki to some degree) "say that you are right" might not be what's going on here.  The examples were not crafted to generate a predetermined result, were they?  I saw no fell intent in the way he phrased his post or the examples.

quote:
I do feel bad that the player had these situations happen. My advise is still if their frustration or disappointment in the game prevents from continued enjoyment of the game then quit.  There are many games that are on RPOL, and unfortunately a player will not always like all the games they play.

Hmm... could it be the reason the OP is here is to work through some of this before wading into a more direct discussion with the other folks involved?  I don't assume that is the case, but nor would I exclude it based on what has been posted here so far.  For the OP, stepping back and gaining a broader  perspective might be a first step.

Quitting may not be in the OPs nature.  Perhaps he values logistics over tactics?

Our points of view diverge primarily in our willingness to make different assumptions about the original post and the replies to it.  Down the path of assumption lies madness, hence all human beings are mad in one way or another...  Please don't be mad with me for disagreeing with you.