The stupid expectations of some DMs...

[rounser]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In my experience, most critical player stupidity results a misperception or the player being on a different wavelength than everyone else.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A much more common scenario IMO is that of DM expectations that aren't conveyed correctly, resulting in a seemingly "stupid" response in the DM's eyes, but which might actually represent poor communication skills or too much assumption on the DM's part.

In my experience, the players collectively misunderstanding what the DM wants from them is a lot more common than a single player being on a different wavelength to "everyone else" - I guess this is why we need a "Stupid DM expectations" thread.

A sister thread to "The lovely stupidity of some players..." thread.

Some of us have had games where what the DM intends the PCs to do is totally lost on the players, or their approach is sabotaged because it differs too much from the DM's intended solution. Any stories to share?

 

[Limper]

I'm rather familiar with the DM believing with all his heart and soul that he's giving out thousands of clues....... not one of which we the players ever get, and treating us like we are stupid or that we are ignoring his plot....... it will drive you mad.

When clue's are things like the room dimensions when added together useing numerology equaled the holy number of a god.... that he'd created and as players we had no idea existed. We were cursed and died and had no idea why or how.

Have you ever been subjected to authentic Mongolian riddles? (they were from a web site somewhere..... truely incomprehensible stuff). I personally suck at riddles from my own culture and time period ( I seldom can narrow down my answers enough..... or I think way to deep on it). I'll post more of these wonders of DM cruelty some other time..... I'm getting miffed thinking about it. We've been playing for over ten years..... he still wont divulge what the hell was going on in the first setting he ran, still! I think he gets off on having secret's it empowers him..... he likes to gloat that he can make stuff up and not reveal it in any sane way.

 

[Crothian]

It's useualy just miscommunication. It happens from both sides of the table. We all know DMs are not perfect, as we all know PCs aren't either. I've been on both sides of these problems, so I now try to be a little more comunitive. But it's not easy to do. So, instead of bitching and complain about the problems and telling stories and sharing examples of them, does anyone have a suggestion or idea that would stop this from happening or at least lessen the impacts of it?

 

[rounser]

So, instead of bitching and complain about the problems and telling stories and sharing examples of them, does anyone have a suggestion or idea that would stop this from happening or at least lessen the impacts of it?

Hey, whoa there, that's constructive and all.

Evidence from the other threads suggest that DMs seem to have no compunctions about calling their players "stupid", so I think that there's room to even the balance a little.

Nevertheless, you raise a good point. I would suggest that one of the best solutions is raised by Psion as one of his review criteria; don't put "bottlenecks" into your adventures. That way, if the PCs don't meet the DM's expectations of them, the adventure can proceed in some other way. This doesn't address the issue of lessening miscommunication, though, especially when the DM (or module designer) is attempting to be subtle.

------ RttToEE SPOILER -----
















The hint in the document in the moathouse was completely missed by my players, probably because they're used to D&D and it was a rather Call of Cthulhu play style clue. (I think Monte Cook's years of CoC play have rubbed off on him a bit.) This is an example of a kind of bottleneck-for-play-to-proceed-further which I think is probably best to avoid, and also an example of where deliberate subtlety on the designer's part can simply go over player's heads.

 

[Black Omega]

Communication really is the key here. And reasonable expectation. I sometimes throw out a clue I don't expect anyone to ever get, but I like it and it's not vital they figure it out.

even sometimes obvious clues won't get picked up on if the group simply isn't interested. The first game I ran there was a new crimelord in town called Alabaster. The group's 'contact' with the government called himself White Knight. He guided them against every criminal group in the area except Alabaster's. Any investigation at all would have revealed their buddy had no contact with the government they could find. I thought I was being rather obvious. The group never even came close to figuring out what was going on.

 

[Ziggurat]

The best clues to give players are the ones that they don't pick up on until it's too late, but that appear so amazingly obvious afterwards that they blame themselves instead of you

It's a very fine line to walk, but if you know your players well it can be immensely satisfying. I'm especially fond of misinformation; most players are hungry for information, and a clever (read: Machiavellian) malignant source will give them just enough truth that they'll believe them when it comes to the big lies.

 

[ninthcouncil]

I'm especially fond of misinformation; most players are hungry for information, and a clever (read: Machiavellian) malignant source will give them just enough truth that they'll believe them when it comes to the big lies.

Or, make sure that the truth is messed up before they get it... A DM I played under used to delight in making sure that crucial verbal clues/instructions were relayed to us via the player who was least likely to remember it accurately. If given 3 pieces of information, he would competely forget one and hopelessly mangle another.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Some rules of life and DMing.

Never bet against stupidity.

KISS - keep it simple stupid.

Never live beyond your means.

Life is simple, it is people that are difficult.

There is only one type of person in the world, a$$hole. It is just that you like some of them.

 

[Ziggurat]

Or, make sure that the truth is messed up before they get it... A DM I played under used to delight in making sure that crucial verbal clues/instructions were relayed to us via the player who was least likely to remember it accurately. If given 3 pieces of information, he would competely forget one and hopelessly mangle another.

Oo, I haven't tried that. The key to its success, I suppose, is having the fact that the PCs were forewarned come out at some point. Again, they only have themselves to blame.

Information that's mangled before it gets to the PCs can be fun as well; an illiterate peasant misreading something, for example, or misinterpreting.

There's also information overload; in my campaign there's a street-corner where all the conspiracy theorists gather. The PCs spent an entire session listening to their ramblings. All of the stories have some element of truth, and one was straight-out part of the underlying plot, but there's so much else being said that it's nearly impossible to sift out the dross until it's too late.

All this said, my players have surprised me on occasion by working things out, and I'm always very impressed and pleased when they do

 

[Chimera]

I agree that most stupid mistakes take place when the players are on a different wave length than the GM. BUT, having said that, it is the PLAYERS responsibility to make sure that they are paying attention and keeping on the same wave-length as the GM. It is very frustrating and work-intensive as a GM to try to keep your players on the same page, and we have enough other WORK to do just to run a game.

At some point, the players gotta accept responsibility for their share of the work involved.

Some players are just bone-headed, or have such odd internal logic that they are difficult to play with. A former friend of mine falls into this category. He would get the wildest, stupidest, oddest ideas into his head, completely ignoring (sometimes willfully) or misinterpreting what I said. I would literally stop the game to explain to him what I was saying or thinking, only to have him totally ignore my explanation and insist on doing something wildly stupid. Then, when he got bitten, he would get irate and scream "my character would never do something that stupid!" To which I could only respond "I warned you three times that you were making a wrong assumption and you still insisted that you were doing X. Now live with the consequences!"

Miscommunication and differing interpretations of the same information form the basis of almost all human problems. Not surprising when it happens in D&D too.

But that being said, as I also said above, it is a two-way street, and the players have to take responsibility for making sure they LISTEN to their GM and understand what is going on. I would much rather stop and have a 10 minute OC conversation to clear up what it going on in the game than to have another one of these "you suck as a GM because I can't be bothered to actually listen to you" moments.