Whatever happened to all the adventurous heroes?

[Captain Tagon]

Paladin: "All in a knight's work."

Puntastic.

 

[tonym]

As a player, I probably would've asked you, "What kind of screams? Good screams, bad screams, muffled screams? Male or female screams?" Screams bug me and make me curious, so I'd want more info. But I wouldn't automatically have my low-level PC go looking for trouble. (Unless, of course, I'd decided to roleplay him that way ahead of time.)

Generally, PCs have to be careful about rushing into situations where the DM can walk-the-plank your PC and say, "Well, next time you should think and be more careful."

But if you've never given your players cause to be wary of a set-up, then I'm not sure why they didn't go after the hook. Maybe they were waiting for you to repeat the screams another time or two, so they'd be sure the noises were important and not just scenic flavor.

Tony M

 

[Cinderfall]

My thoughts

Here are my thoughts on this topic (for whatever they're worth). Primarily, the players need to meet the DM half way. Does this mean they can't be scared or annoyed? Not at all (in fact those kind of details can add great dimension to a game), but if every adventure is an absolute chore to get them involved, then something, IMO, is very wrong. Many times I have sat back an wondered why the hell does this character/group adventure? Players should make characters who will WANT to take chances (eventually if not immediately). Also, at some point the party as a whole has to decide to be proactive. Otherwise you get the player equivalent of DM railroading - PCs that must be led by the nose. Which can lead to an equally boring campaign death.

When I am playing, I always sit back and consider my character concept. If the character would make a better NPC (because he's too weird, too anti-social, too location dependant, or too abrasive) then I adapt or start over. All too often players can make characters with no thought of the GROUP (that includes the play group as well as the in game party). Compared to the work the DM must put in, a little forethought and effort from the players isn't too much to ask.

With that being said, I would agree (to an extent) with the others that mentioned making the hook somewhat more personally engaging. The provided example wasn't bad at all if the PCs were more proactive. Perhaps a little more of a push would've worked better. With the above example I would have had some part of the hook spill in on the PCs. Something like the door to their cabin/section bursts open admitting a bloodied sailor running from whatever. That way they HAVE to do something. Personally, I've always been leery of using PCs backgrounds against them. Do it too much and surprise-surprise they start making orphans. And that's if you get a developed background.

IMO I think ultimately you should do what you've done, talk with the players and figure our what kind of game everyone (including yourself) want. If it's too difficult to get the PCs into an adventure ask (in a non-confrontational way) what it will take and even if the players really want to game. All too often people are too nice to say what they think. Anyway, thanks for reading.

 

[Whimsical]

a little forethought and effort from the players isn't too much to ask.

Yes, but do you actually ask for it? You are presuming that every player has the same gaming values you do. But it is more likely that the players have just created their charcters and they have immersed themselves into the "what would my character do in this situation" mindset instead of the "what does the DM want us to do" mindset.

So, it isn't too much to ask, but you must ask for it if you don't want to be disappointed.

 

[Cinderfall]

The DM shouldn't have to ask for it, it is simply being considerate of your fellow gamer (including the DM). The only value I think is universal is that D&D is a group activity. Just don't ruin it for others. It's pretty simple. Players and DMs who make characters/campaigns that make it difficult on the group for their own enjoyment are being selfish. Sure, you should be accomadating(sp?), up to a point. How surprised can people be when they put nothing into a campaign and it falls apart? How many threads are there on this and the dozens of other message boards about disfunctional groups? I see it all the time, it's the "my character concept is the only thing that matters" mindset. Funny how it means nothing when the campaign implodes. So many problems can be avoided in a game if people just asked a few questions. I always thought roleplaying was about having fun as a
GROUP. Just my opinion. Thanks for reading.

 

[Numion]

Yes, but did he actively go out seeking a way to gain/display his powers, or did he forsake his name and go off into the woods?

In D&D terms it would sound like:

DM: You discover there is an ancient prophecy which states that you will gain some powers in the future and become a king.

Player: That's fine, I'm just going to go hang with the elves.

But Aragorn didn't go hang with the elves in the woods. He went adventuring, even as far as serving in Gondors army for a while, incognito. he protected the shire and ranged wide areas of Middle-Earth.

In game terms he was adventuring - he just took the prophesies as the dms plants for the high-level 'King of Gondor' adventure somewhere down the pipeline

 

[Kodam]

Hi!

Why not go with "actions have consequences"? So they don't act when hearing the noise. The next day many of the sailors are wounded so that they have to do their work. Their hard work. And there are still some questions to answer...

Kodam

 

[diaglo]

Were you deliberately ignoring what I actually said in order to make your point?

Quasqueton

no, i'm trying to get you to look at it from the player's perspective. as to why they didn't jump at the first opportunity. i realize they eventually went. but still you seemed upset or at least mildly disturbed they didn't take the hook.


you also mentioned an immigrant ship... again they are passengers and the ship or at least most immigrant ships i have known are crowded..

people make noises. some times they are having fun late at night. dancing, playing games, some times they are fighting... again this is something the crew should look into... as the PCs don't have jurisdiction on the ship.


if the screams were: FIRE... i think it is a different call.... or MONSTER ... or STOP THIEF...

but faint screams can mean anything. besides passing fancy.. i wouldn't go after that hook.

are you saying there were no noises the whole trip until then? like i said this sounds to metagamey.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well, RPGs have 'evolved' to such a point that if the characters are what they are supposed to be, then why should they get involved?

Usually I talk to the players ahead of time and come up with reasons why their doing what they're doing. I posted a similiar question of wandering heroes vs. mercenaries over at Necromancer. At least with mercenaries you know what motivates them.

 

[kingamy]

Q says that he asked at the start of the campaign for "heroic" PCs.

Players making PCs for this campaign that are too scared to respond to screams, or don't respond if there's no money in it, are not creating heroic PCs.

These PCs were not created according to the GM's guidelines. He's got a fair beef, in my books. If nothing at the start had been said about PC generation (in addition to methods of stat generation, and which rule supplements to use, the GM has a fair amount of input into what personality types he wants in his game) then anything goes. But if the GM has stated PC personality types he wants, then that should be followed. If you don't like it, you're playing in the wrong game.

kingamy