Am I a cruel DM?

[Ambrus]

Ambrus, if you were so convinced that what you had done was correct then why bother to post it as a question in the first place? I mean you must have thought it possible that you had been unfair to the players or else you wouldn't ahve bothered posting it for discussion.

Well, I didn't think I was being unfair at the time, but when then accused of being unfair I felt that it's my duty to carefully consider that possibility. I care about my players' opinions. I also believe that DMs should be accountable for their decisions. Being personally involved in the situation makes it difficult to cast an unbiased eye on the situation though, so I thought I'd try getting some unbiased opinions about it online. I figure that if the majority of people online think I was wrong then I'll seriously have to reconsider my DMing style. How would you go about it?

It really seems that you have been spending your time trying to justify your decisions/actions instead of listening to what others see as right or wrong about them.

I assure you that I've carefully read every post so far. I've gone into far more detail about the events in question then I originally intended to because people keep asking for additional information or clarifications. My intention wasn't to justify my actions but simply to answer peoples' questions, and perhaps correct them about something if I believe they've misunderstood something that's been presented unclearly.

I've done my best to avoid arguing or disagreeing with those who offer me negative critisisms. I'm sorry if you feel I haven't succeeded. I assure you I've been keeping track of people's opinions about what I did wrong (I shouldn't have had the gnomes betray the PCs, I should have been making NPCs more compliant to the PCs with high Cha/diplomacy scores, I shouldn't have had a NPC geas the party unawares, I should have had the PCs in a position to observe and interfere with the machinations of the gnomes, I should have presented more options for getting the artifact out of the city, ect.) and their suggestions (end the campaign, let someone else DM, wrap up the storyline quickly, don't ever use geases as a DM, let the party chase down the ship and get the artifact back, have the gnomes send the party a consolation prize, have the gnomes dispel the geas, have some NPCs be nice to the party for a change, have the gnomes finish using the artifact and have them return it to the party, ect.) They're all valid suggestions and I appreciate that people have taken the time to offer them, I may use some. Some aren't applicable to our situation, but that's not the fault of the posters.

I think the GM mentioned that the artifact being discussed actually radiates an anti-magic field. If they are putting this on an airship, I need to ask...Does this airship have any magic keeping it afloat or pushing it forward? Wouldn't the anti-magic cause some problems?

Yes the ship has a [mysterious to the players] mode of quasi-magical lift and propulsion (though it also uses sails for extra speed and maneuverability). It was shown ahead of time to the players though that the artifact wouldn't cause the ship to crash, though it'll slow it down a bit.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I've done my best to avoid arguing or disagreeing with those who offer me negative critisisms. I'm sorry if you feel I haven't succeeded.

Actually, you have been incredibly calm in the ensuing discussion of what you did and did not "do wrong". It speaks well of you, and actually lends quite a bit of weight to the argument that what you did was reasonable.

I shouldn't have had the gnomes betray the PCs

Well, the PCs did make it incredibly easy. Perhaps better to say that, under the circumstances, there should have been signs that the gnomes did not unanamously betray the PCs. Of course, you can easily argue that the PCs not having woken up as their crates plunged to the ground far, far below was just such a sign.

I should have been making NPCs more compliant to the PCs with high Cha/diplomacy scores

You mentioned the sprite being madly in love with on PC. High Cha may not be as useful as high Str, but you should take it into account. Likewise, Diplomacy costs as much as Climbing, and you should get some bang for your buck. Of course, as I pointed out earlier, diplomats need to have some areas of flexability for Diplomacy to be effective.

I shouldn't have had a NPC geas the party unawares

I have serious reservations about a supposedly LG character signing a contract with the PCs, then Geasing them without warning, when such action was not part of the contract. I imagine that, coupled with this, the gnome incident might have seemed a bit...similar?

I should have had the PCs in a position to observe and interfere with the machinations of the gnomes

It might have helped had the gnomes said, "Of course, it isn't us you have to convince...." or if a Sense Motive check would show them growing a bit nervous about meeting with their superiors following what they believe to be a change of plan. It might have made the PCs a bit nervous as well.

BUT, the players actually were nervous about the plan (or, at least, one of them was) and they went along with it anyway.

I should have presented more options for getting the artifact out of the city

I am again confounded by the idea of a LG Church having sent them on this mission, with a Geas to boot, without having given them any idea as to how they would get it out of the city. It seems to me that your group might lack a planner.

end the campaign, let someone else DM

Um, are you holding hostages so that other people cannot DM? Are you forcing people to sit at your table and play? If not, then these suggestions should be politely ignored.

wrap up the storyline quickly

Honestly, this doesn't sound like a storyline that can be wrapped up quickly. Nor do the players have an easy out at this moment. Based upon what's happening with the NPCs and in the world, the PCs are just going to have to decide what they want to do. No one likes a duex ex machina, and I certainly wouldn't recommend you setting one up just to end the storyline.

It would also rob their current frustration of any meaning later. If they're paying for it with blood, sweat, and tears, they deserve to reach the end on their own steam.

don't ever use geases as a DM

Well, I haven't done so yet, and I do think that they should be used sparingly. If a Geas is intended as a kind of curse, then there should be the means to break it (just not right away). If it is not meant as a kind of curse, then the PCs should have understood what they were getting into.

It's a meta-gaming issue, perhaps. But, really, how did you expect the players to react?

let the party chase down the ship and get the artifact back

Well, under the current set-up, they have to try this, don't they?

have the gnomes send the party a consolation prize, have the gnomes dispel the geas, have some NPCs be nice to the party for a change, have the gnomes finish using the artifact and have them return it to the party, ect.

These are actually all parcel of the same general idea that not every NPC out there is going to be a rat-bastard, and that there have to be some NPCs out there that the PCs can like, trust, and be willing to help at personal cost. The possible suggestions are not necessarily the best ones, but conceptually, there has to be some reason that the PCs are willing to be the good guys.

Unless you are playing in an evil campaign, which does not seem to be the case here.


RC


P.S.: And, again, overall, you seem to be doing a great job. Feel free to ignore any of my comments that you don't feel apply. Not that you needed my permission to do so. lol.

 

[tonym]

Actually, you have been incredibly calm in the ensuing discussion of what you did and did not "do wrong". It speaks well of you, and actually lends quite a bit of weight to the argument that what you did was reasonable.

I agree with Raven Crowking. After sending a few of my posts, I thought, "Holy crap, I should've been more diplomatic--Ambrus is going to tear into me over that." But you never did. Your replies have always been completely courteous. Few threads are more annoying than those where a DM asks if he did something wrong, then proceeds to rip people apart for suggesting he did something wrong. This thread is NOTHING like those threads. I rattle my d20 in salute, sir.

(rattle, rattle)


Tony M

 

[JebeddoGarrick]

A Gnomon's Musings

It is fun to read everyone's different views of what happened. Some were very insightful. I'm the player of the gnome in this game but don't ask me what number I am.

The geas was very apropriate under the circumstances. It gave the quest the air of a divine blessing. All the PCs had been involved in negociating the terms of the oath.

I don't think the group can blaim anyone other than themselves for what happened. We knew that we had bad relations with the gnomes. There were racial tensions involved. We had told them our goals were different from theirs. We knew that they didn't trust us, due to our own actions.

Yet we went and put ourselves in their power. I saw it as a way to build an alliance. We would earn their friendship by trusting them first. The party suggested the plan to hide in crates, decided to crate the important object separately, and didn't make any provisions to escape the crates. One of our members took a sleeping draught to knock him out for the duration of the voyage. We didn't even drill small holes in the crates to see what was going on outside.

My character is a gnome that is headstrong and independent. He has always had trouble fitting in. He is always wandering off alone to investigate something, much to chagrin of the other party members. Then along come these gnomes who are interested in the same things as him and follow the same god. They invite him to join one of their secret meetings. He wanted desperately to trust them and would have overlooked all but the most obvious reasons not to.

The issue is probably more one of pacing or plot arc than NPC actions. Imagine playing D&D for 35 sessions in one dungeon that you can't leave for risk of getting caught. You can't buy or sell anything. You can't do any crafting nor speak to any NPCs outside the dungeon. It wore down on everyone's moral. In a computer game equivalent, it was the end of a giant level and we would have been rewarded with a cut scene. I guess that was what the players were expecting.

However, the time was not wasted. We broke the seal on what an empire had kept hidden for several millenia. We have something in our possession that is equally important, if not more. Our actions will help reveal the light of hope to those who had given up.

Jebeddo
__________________
"If we shadows have offended
Think but this, and all is mended.
That you have but slumb'red here
While these visions did appear."
- A Midsummer Night's Dream

 

[Raven Crowking]

Glad to hear your views, Jebeddo. I was having some difficulty reconciling some of the things I had learned with the overall imression that Ambrus was a reasonable person with a complex campaign.

RC

 

[Esme]

Another PC from the game

Hello, I'm another PC from Ambrus' game.

First off, I have to say that Ambrus is a very good GM in my opinion. His strenght is in creating a logical and believable world and in crafting interesting NPCs for us to interact with. I trust in his impartiality.

My character (the sorcerer) feels saddened that the gnomes chose to betray us but he can't say he blames them, as relations between the Empire and the gnome/dwarven psion faction is strained at best. He actually died in the first battle with the gnomes, after starting the battle and feels his death was just penance for his aggresion.

For people to understand why we were so trusting to hand off the artefact to the gnomes, they have to understand we had been in the donjon for 30 odd sessions and returning to the surface made us giddy with excitement. We easily could have found another way to leave the city, but we were so exhausted and fearful to be caught by the authorities (it's very complicated, but basically the item is the most valuable thing in the world) that when the gnomes offered their ship, I jumped on the chance mand did not give to much thought to betrayal. it was perhaps not to wise, but it's in character for me I think.

As for the geas, neither my character or me the player feel cheated in this situation. We swore an holy oath to recover an artifact, and if the gods chose to bindf us to that (working through an elven woman) then that's just more proof of the importance of the quest.

Now we must clearly dry our tears, find the location of the artefact and fly off to it's rescue.

Yay adventure!

Esmé

 

[hong]

It didn't occur to them that they might get overruled by their own allies.

Why not?

I'm not trying to justify what I did or make excuses, but please keep in mind that I was improvising most of this as it developed. :\

Never mind. After all, gaming is a character-building experience, you know.

 

[hong]

If all of the information Ambrus gave is correct, then all of Fusangite's above conclusions are mechanically correct.

If this aggravates the players, then there are some decisions to be made.

Hong mentioned earlier that the "purpose" of a campaign was to present an enjoyable gaming experience in an enjoyable world, while Fusangite would replace "Enjoyable" with "Believable"

Neither is the correct answer.

Only those who believe the purpose of playing a game is not to have fun would think that "enjoyable" is not the correct answer.

I've played in both sorts of campaigns, and I much prefer the Believable model to the Universally Enjoyable one

Not, of course, that anyone said anything about "universally enjoyable".

It is true that:

1) There is more than one dimension to what makes a game enjoyable.

2) Different people will put different priorities on each dimension, depending on taste.

This does NOT lead to:
3) You must therefore cater for everyone's tastes.

It DOES lead to:
4) You are under no obligation to game with people whose tastes are radically different to yours.

It ALSO leads to:
5) If you have decided that someone's tastes are not so radically different to yours as to rule out gaming with them, you have an obligation to work with them to build a game that will be an enjoyable experience to both, since roleplaying is (generally) a social nteraction carried out between equals, and unless the two of you are clones, there will likely still be points of disagreement.

Of course, 5) requires something in the way of people skills and the ability to reach a consensus. I believe I said something earlier about those with the social skills of a walnut, which might explain their difficulty with this.

 

[tonym]

Thanks for posting, Jebeddo and Esme. Coupled with Ketherian, I now count 3 Players who are fine with Ambrus' handling of the gnome situation. Not only fine with it, but happy with everything Ambrus has done.

THEN, standing apart from those happy Players, is Noelani, the fiance who wrote, "This isn't a matter of us PCs being incompetent. Its a matter of the world being completely stacked against us." Noelani made it clear she is fed-up with the level of frustration in the campaign, the usage of deceipt by so many NPCs, the geas, and several other things.

I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it, but 'something' is bugging me about how Jebeddo, Esme and Ketherian so completely disagree with Noelani. It's like, why are they not giving her any support at all? She is their fellow Player, and they are all flat-out contradicting her.

It would've been so easy to say something like, "I understand where Noelani is coming from; the world often does seem to be stacked against us. But I enjoy it, personally."

But none of them are sypathizing with her...

I am confused.

I guess I still believe Noelani, in other words. Ambrus' world would be improved if it was a little less frustrating. Not a cakewalk, of course. STILL frustrating. Just a little 'less' frustrating.

Tony M

 

[Acid_crash]

What's sad is that no matter how good a game goes, nor how well a DM is, if all players BUT one are happy with the game, and that one is not happy, the DM feels like it was a failure because one isn't happy with it.

This happened to me in my last game. I didn't like being put in that position.