Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5426984" data-attributes="member: 7006">Which is fine... you can run your game however you want and no one will say otherwise.&nbsp; But you posted that you were a bit upset that the players get pissed at you regardless of what you do, so all we're doing is pointing out the places where some of that acrimony could have gotten generated.And you never did answer my question.&nbsp; What was your expected &quot;right answer&quot; to the party bringing the refugees to the front gates?&nbsp; Did you have one?&nbsp; If you didn't... then right there is the reason why your party will &quot;always get pissed at you&quot; as you said.&nbsp; You are giving them impossible to win scenarios.Now some players are okay with that kind of thing.&nbsp; It generates drama and allows them to play their PCs in situations that are different than usual dungeoncrawl rping.&nbsp; I myself have no problem with these kind of scenarios in my roleplaying, because I find the improvisational back and forth between player and DM to be a lot of fun.&nbsp; But it seems like at the barest minimum your monk/paladin player did not like it, and basically said &quot;screw it&quot; when the ideas he came up with were shot down.So my suggestion would be one of two things.&nbsp; If you did in fact have in your mind a path the PCs could have taken to have them fulfill their quest... then drop a few more breadcrumbs to help them out if they don't seem to be getting it.&nbsp; Or if you haven't decided on a way for the PCs to succeed... either lighten up your &quot;realism&quot; on one of the other paths so that the PCs can finally take it and feel good about their result... or let them fail at the main task but give them a quick win elsewhere so they feel like progression has been made.It's tough to do... especially when you might want things &quot;gritty&quot;... but not all players want that.&nbsp; Some want to feel like progress is being made.&nbsp; And if you occasionally have to help them along to achieve that... it's not a bad thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 5426984, member: 7006"] Which is fine... you can run your game however you want and no one will say otherwise. But you posted that you were a bit upset that the players get pissed at you regardless of what you do, so all we're doing is pointing out the places where some of that acrimony could have gotten generated. And you never did answer my question. What was your expected "right answer" to the party bringing the refugees to the front gates? Did you have one? If you didn't... then right there is the reason why your party will "always get pissed at you" as you said. You are giving them impossible to win scenarios. Now some players are okay with that kind of thing. It generates drama and allows them to play their PCs in situations that are different than usual dungeoncrawl rping. I myself have no problem with these kind of scenarios in my roleplaying, because I find the improvisational back and forth between player and DM to be a lot of fun. But it seems like at the barest minimum your monk/paladin player did not like it, and basically said "screw it" when the ideas he came up with were shot down. So my suggestion would be one of two things. If you did in fact have in your mind a path the PCs could have taken to have them fulfill their quest... then drop a few more breadcrumbs to help them out if they don't seem to be getting it. Or if you haven't decided on a way for the PCs to succeed... either lighten up your "realism" on one of the other paths so that the PCs can finally take it and feel good about their result... or let them fail at the main task but give them a quick win elsewhere so they feel like progression has been made. It's tough to do... especially when you might want things "gritty"... but not all players want that. Some want to feel like progress is being made. And if you occasionally have to help them along to achieve that... it's not a bad thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification