Brody recently made a post to the jointhesaga mailing group and forums concerning OOC consent between players and staff during roleplaying events. He used the example of an event that occured on Otherspace several years ago, in which players and staff agreed that no PCs would die in the event, but still maintained the cause and effect needed for dramatic roleplay. I will not repost his post here, but he may do so if he wishes.
I myself am an admin on one of his MUSHes, and recently used this idea of OOC consent (actually today) in an event I ran. On Otherspace we have a taskroll system, which uses automated dice to test the skills of players, much like a tabletop RPG. However, I find that in an event, or scene, when taskrolls become involved, it tends to complicate things, and take the fun otu of it for me, the admin, of running the event. This is due to the pause and break in IC action to OOC action in order to determine what happens ICly later.
I find this extremely disturbing when I run an event, and believe that players feel the schism in the roleplay as well. This also serves to help propogate the belief in an 'admin conspiracy' when Admin-played PCs roll highly on skills or whatnot.
Therefore, in the event I just ran, I chose to form an OOC consent with the players involved. In that none of them would die, and they could choose to take wounds or whatnot on their own behalf. So it worked much like freeform RP does in a non-coded environment.
It worked out great, and not once was I driven out of my IC mindset by OOC complications. So I'm wondering, do players and staff on other MU*'s find it distracting when coded systems become involved in roleplay?
- Dane
|