D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[Mort]

I don't see much correlation between the two. One is who makes the final call on rulings and world building. It pretty explicitly has nothing to do with control of what the PCs do. The other is ignoring what the PCs do because you didn't like it and forcing them to "fix it" by playing the way you want.

The through line is a strong divide in DM/player "responsibilities." The DM having full control of the world, but almost none of the PCs.

The weirdness here is the OPs description of strong control over both through railroading/force/illusionism. Yet the plot still going completely pear shaped.

The real solution of just sitting down and having a chat about what kind of game they want and what kind of game the DM wants to run is also unrelated.

I've suggested the very same solution in this thread. The OP doesn't seem to like it.

 

[Oofta]

The through line is a strong divide in DM/player "responsibilities." The DM having full control of the world, but almost none of the PCs.

The weirdness here is the OPs description of strong control over both through railroading/force/illusionism. Yet the plot still going completely pear shaped.



I've suggested the very same solution in this thread. The OP doesn't seem to like it.

I agree this feels like a weird railroad with a DM that's dissapointed that the group didn't follow the railroad exactly as planned and made a decision/mistake that wasn't according to the plot.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Me.

In case it wasn't clear, I meant compared to the solutions provided by the OP.

I'm not blaming the players at all, and yet I still disagree with the idea of a do-over.

The potential positive outcome could well be a greater level of player engagement in that game/campaign - they're driving the bus now, to the extent the DM is willing to let them, so let 'em drive and - while still making sure there's consequences out there - see where it goes.

I didn't say you were blaming the players. but there very clearly are many folks who are.

If I had a game that somehow went this way, with the players totally going rogue and attacking soldiers and the like, then so be it. That'd be the way the game went. But I'm also fine with the group being immoral or even bad guys. At least, up to a point. I wouldn't feel the need to try and correct their behavior or punish them or what not. If I did, I wouldn't address it in the game, I'd discuss it with them like adults.

What I don't get is arranging for this to all happen and then being upset at the results. That's my question. Given the scenario as described, and accepting that this is somehow not desired or was unexpected... how else could it have played out?

I'd love to hear what you think, @Lanefan ... to me it seems almost like a foregone conclusion.

 

[Maxperson]

Kind of reminds me of the kind of thing I have come across in some modules where the vital clue is gated behind a difficult to find secret door.

Hah! I made that mistake once when I started DMing in junior high. I reasoned that something so important would be well hidden. Well, it was and they couldn't find it and the adventure crashed. Never made that mistake again.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Hah! I made that mistake once when I started DMing in junior high. I reasoned that something so important would be well hidden. Well, it was and they couldn't find it and the adventure crashed. Never made that mistake again.

We have all been there.
My favourite solution riffs of what I think is a Dashiel Hammett quote, have someone come after the party with a clue in their back pocket.

 

[Mort]

We have all been there.
My favourite solution riffs of what I think is a Dashiel Hammett quote, have someone come after the party with a clue in their back pocket.

I can't remember where I got it from, but I generally try to have any TRULY important information find the party in at least 3 different obvious ways (the point being at least one will hit home).

 

[Baron Opal II]

In this case it is a Rec Center...no bars on the windows or anything like that.

Ohhh... Suddenly this makes much more sense. I was one of those squirrely youths back in the day. We had 3-4 DMs that would run regularly in the afternoons and a like number in the evening. Never had a substitute DM when one was sick, that's new. Some of the tables were exclusive, others had a player cap, 1-2 were open.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I can't remember where I got it from, but I generally try to have any TRULY important information find the party in at least 3 different obvious ways (the point being at least one will hit home).

Yes that is the sensible way of doing things.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes that is the sensible way of doing things.

I used a similar principle for a murder mystery. Three completely distinct lines of evidence that could point to the true killer rather than the person who was framed:

1. Forensic analysis of the body, weapon, etc. to see how the death had to have happened well before the last "sighting" of the deceased
2. Interviewing people, especially staff and less prominent "guests" because certain things couldn't line up
3. Analysis of the victim's room and effects, which had been artfully arranged to point to the wrong target but this meant removing documents that could implicate the real killer

The party did just fine, even found new lines of evidence I had not considered, and leveraged success in one line to get past confusing or seemingly contradictory evidence in another. All in all, a very successful mystery.

 

[Vaalingrade]

You're hubristically assuming your PC is the biggest fish in the town, and more powerful NPCs dont exist either for hire, or working for the Mafia already.

Falsely.

Go ahead and piss off the Flaming Fist, or the Zhents in my campaign and see what happens to you. Expect very high level NPCs to come-a-looking for you.

We're jumping back and forth between real life and game. In game, at this point I'd know the the the God of Gods will magic up something to beat me to be petty about me not doing what I was told. Then I'd never let him live it down out of character.

Like, five years later (which would have been the last time they were allowed to run the game), we'd be ordering pizza and the wrong toppings would come and I'd be like, "Well why don't you send the Flaming Fist or the Zhents after Mr. Domino then?"