Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay

[FrogReaver]

I wasn't accusing you of not wanting to challenge your PCs. I was saying that challenging a character's weak points can be a good thing as long as it's not overdone.

I disagree that it is auto failure. It's a challenge for the character to hold his tongue THIS ONE TIME. Not unlike a caster being confronted by a golem needs to figure out a different way of dealing with the threat than their go-to methods. It's not an auto-failure, but an opportunity to go outside their comfort zone. Admittedly, these sorts of challenges are more likely to result in failure because they target something that the character/party isn't adept at handling. So, yes, be prepared for the possibility of failure (although I feel that goes for less difficult challenges as well, since it's always a possibility).

holding your tongue isn’t an action. It’s doing nothing. A wizard confronted by a magic immune critter will not do nothing. There’s lots of other things for him to try.

 

[Imaculata]

to make it clear: the issue with that scene was the calling of guards at a single insult by a single pc in an otherwise progressing social encounter.

that reaction done in that manner was the only unjustified action in the whole series of events.

I wouldn't say it was entirely unjustified. The npc was not only rude, but also told him to his face that he was crazy AND unfit to rule. If the Baron really is crazy and kind of paranoid, then it makes sense that he would immediately have that player put in irons.

It is not how I would have ruled it though. Because it primes the situation for an escalation, which is exactly what happened. However, one of the players then chose to escalate the situation further by drawing a weapon. At that moment, their lives are forfeit.

I don't think it is wrong for a DM to present a social encounter where the players must walk on egg shells a bit, provided that it is foreshadowed and the players are aware they are walking on eggshells.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes, it's smart play to assess the challenge and put forward the strengths of the party while minimizing its weaknesses. I am for sure not going to save the party from themselves.

“Smart play” carries a bit of a connotation that everything is a puzzle or obstacle that can be overcome if you do just the right actions.

in such a game it would surely be“smart play” to hold your tongue. But that doesn’t mean it’s fun play.

 

[prabe]

Why do y’all insinuate others only want to place things in front of their PCs that they are optimized to handle. Do you realize how unreasonable that sounds?

I think some of us see this:

Placing an ancient dragon in the way of a level 1 pc isn’t a challenge, it’s an auto lose - a death sentence. Placing an insults everyone PC in front of a will never tolerate insults NPC is pretty much the same thing, it’s not a challenge, it’s an auto lose.

as pointing in that direction, with the talk of "placing" things in front of the party. FWIW, I usually only prep a session-ish ahead of time, based on what the PCs look as though they're going to be doing, where they're going to be going, so pretty much everything they're encountering I'm putting in front of them (though I try to maintain verisimilitude). You might be reading my contrasting example as me insulting my own style of GMing (which is actually in my range, but I wasn't doing it here).

 

[FrogReaver]

I wouldn't say it was entirely unjustified. The npc was not only rude, but also told him to his face that he was crazy AND unfit to rule. If the Baron really is crazy and kind of paranoid, then it makes sense that he would immediately have that player put in irons.

It is not how I would have ruled it though. Because it primes the situation for an escalation, which is exactly what happened. However, one of the players then chose to escalate the situation further by drawing a weapon. At that moment, their lives are forfeit.

I don't think it is wrong for a DM to present a social encounter where the players must walk on egg shells a bit, provided that it is foreshadowed and the players are aware they are walking on eggshells.

rehashed point: fictionally any number of Baron responses make sense. Game wise the calling of guards is a potential threat on pc life And potential life on the line escalation is the kind of escalation that should Not occur from a single insult.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think some of us see this:



as pointing in that direction, with the talk of "placing" things in front of the party. FWIW, I usually only prep a session-ish ahead of time, based on what the PCs look as though they're going to be doing, where they're going to be going, so pretty much everything they're encountering I'm putting in front of them (though I try to maintain verisimilitude). You might be reading my contrasting example as me insulting my own style of GMing (which is actually in my range, but I wasn't doing it here).

not seeing how any of that makes my position into “only placing obstacles the PCs are optimized to handle in front of them”

 

[prabe]

not seeing how any of that makes my position into “only placing obstacles the PCs are optimized to handle in front of them”

When you talk about "not placing" auto-lose encounters in front of the PCs, it can sound as though you are customizing the encounters to suitably challenge the PCs (which I'd guess you're doing), which is at least near the other end of an axis with how some people describe sandboxes, where there are things around the PCs that can and will kill them more-or-less automatically. Someone who prefers that sandbox style of play (note: I don't, exactly) might describe "suitably challenging the PCs" as "placing obstacles in front of the PCs they're built to handle."

I kinda agree with @Fanaelialae above that putting the "insults everyone" character in a position where that is at least not a winning move isn't Bad GMing. With some warning, I don't even think it's Bad GMing if insulting the Mad Tyrant leads to his ordering Mr. Insulty's execution (though if I'm placing this in front of a party with Mr. Insulty in it, it probably takes more than one insult to do it, and the holding facility is likely to be at least somewhat porous, and the Mad Tyrant is not likely to be vital to the PCs' plans).

 

[iserith]

A player who creates a character that insults everyone regardless of the situation has made his or her own bed in my view and they're welcome to lay in it. I at least hope the player put that in as a Flaw for the character and earns Inspiration. Likely going to need it a lot.

 

[Fanaelialae]

holding your tongue isn’t an action. It’s doing nothing. A wizard confronted by a magic immune critter will not do nothing. There’s lots of other things for him to try.

The character might hold his tongue. The wizard might stand by and watch the more melee oriented party members (clerics, druids, etc) beat the golem down. Both if them have lots of other things they could try.

The rude character could gasp try being polite. You could play it up as a comedic beat (he's terrible at it) or the character could prove surprisingly diplomatic when he tries to be. He could excuse himself to the privy and then go poke around for information that can help the party. He could glower menacingly at the baron when the baron tries to take advantage of the diplomancer's kindness, 'encouraging' him to rethink his words.

There are many possibilities, but if you assume the only possibility is auto failure then that is all you're likely to see.

 

[Maxperson]

cant imagine this being knowable before the campaign starts.

It's Ravenloft. That alone says that you shouldn't be an insult happy PC. Every other thing and its mother are nasty, evil beings that will eat your PCs liver for breakfast if you look at it wrong. Maybe the player didn't know what kind of place Ravenloft is. If not, that should have been explained prior to the beginning of the campaign, yes. However, if the player was aware of the kind of place Ravenloft is, then the player was aware prior to character creation that an insult happy PC would be a bad idea.

I'm currently running a Ravenloft campaign. First campaign in about 20 years outside of the Forgotten Realms. One of my players knew about the setting as he and I have been playing together since 1984. The other 3 players got a session 0 general over view of what kind of place it was, even if I didn't give them all the details.