Am I mean?

[Sunseeker]

Added point for any campaign: the opening situation/encounter should further the story of the campaign. If the PC's don't want anything to do with being outlaws, or at least outlaws in this area, but rather see themselves as this village's heroes, well, this would be a problem of course.

Exactly, how, for example, would one reconcile playing a paladin in this situation. I mean, you bought or were given the map, and as long as the treasure is in some cave that isn't against the laws of good to take, your first option when confronted by guards would be "oh yes we have the map, here you can have it."

Maybe the guard decided to attack them all anyway after you handed over the map, I suppose a paladin could be reasonably believed to decided to defend your comrades against the corrupt guard.

And I suppose letting them out of jail and clearing their names would be a sound enough offer to avoid the "why should we help you" scenario after being imprisoned.

In any case, even if the OP isn't mean, it makes all of this feel much more complicated than necessary.

 

[Myke17]

Im going with buddhafrog. I'll post in the future how it turns out.
I know the PCs, they will think its "awesome". Yeah I may be mean, but I think it will help the group in the long run. What better way to find out how much they got got in them, then to give them something tough from the start.

 

[Mort]

Im going with buddhafrog. I'll post in the future how it turns out.
I know the PCs, they will think its "awesome". Yeah I may be mean, but I think it will help the group in the long run. What better way to find out how much they got got in them, then to give them something tough from the start.

If you truly know the players, maybe this will work, BUT I will echo many of the original responses in saying this seems like a bad idea.

By playing out the scenario to a set conclusion regardless of player action you are letting the players know right off the bat that they don't even have the illusion of choice. They may as well just sit there and enjoy the show; this is a bad precedent to set from the get go, especially with new players.

There's nothing "mean" or "rat bastard" about it and it's certainly not "tough"- it's just a cut scene in disguise, and many people don't like that.

Worse, it's a bait and switch. What if one of the players wants to play something at odds with being a criminal? You don't tell him about your plan because you want it to be a surprise. And surprise it is, as his character concept (fledgling as it may be) gets flushed down the toilet.

I'll again echo some of the early responses and say: If you want this to go the way you want, have the beginning scene be the intro, let all the players know the concept, and have the game start after they've been arrested.

 

[Dausuul]

Im going with buddhafrog. I'll post in the future how it turns out.
I know the PCs, they will think its "awesome". Yeah I may be mean, but I think it will help the group in the long run. What better way to find out how much they got got in them, then to give them something tough from the start.

*shrug* You know your players, we don't. Although I'd point out that you don't know them as players if they've never played before... no way to know for sure how somebody's going to behave at the gaming table until they've got the dice in their hands.

Anyway, I hope you're right and it works out. Good luck with your campaign!

 

[On Puget Sound]

I was wondering why we didn't hear from you for 4 pages, now I see... you were waiting for just one person to agree with you.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Each time this happened, it wasn't the whole party getting beaten and jailed, just my character to "introduce" him to the story. This ever happens to me again, I walk.

Maybe it's not the GM's; maybe it's you.

Just kidding. People take note of how it feels to have this done to your character. That is how most of your players are going to feel if you do this.

Yes, it's mean. It's probably a bad idea.

If this thread were a poll, this response would easily have 95% of the votes.

 

[Cor_Malek]

then to give them something tough from the start.

Seriously what's "tough" about a situation one has no influence on?

The point some were trying to make, is that it's not tough, but rather that many people find it discouraging to discover that they have no real influence on what happens in game; that they just listen to GM and roll dice from time to time. And that plot-chokes like this tend to go downhill, as many players would hate either the quest or the person that gives it to them, so they'd do their best to sabotage the quest, screw the captain over, or both.

It doesn't have "badboy" vibe to it, it's just railroading. It's just "meh".

 

[buddhafrog]

Im going with buddhafrog....

A slippery slope, my friend, and one that should generally be avoided if possible.

 

[buddhafrog]

Seriously what's "tough" about a situation one has no influence on?

The point some were trying to make, is that it's not tough, but rather that many people find it discouraging to discover that they have no real influence on what happens in game; that they just listen to GM and roll dice from time to time. And that plot-chokes like this tend to go downhill, as many players would hate either the quest or the person that gives it to them, so they'd do their best to sabotage the quest, screw the captain over, or both.

It doesn't have "badboy" vibe to it, it's just railroading. It's just "meh".

I understand these thoughts a lot and they may be mostly correct. But if done right, I think it can work well. Like I said, I will try to make it work in my game.

(again, if the scene isn't too time consuming)

There have been tons of movies where the "hero" is over taken, but the manner in which he fights back gave him a lot of choice/respect/freedom of spirit. In some way, being willing to fight back against terrible odds is much more reflective of real choice than knowing that you are generally safe. I would hope that with some good rolling and no fear, the PC's could take out some of the guards. Their actions do matter, and not only in the terms of "I win" or "I lose" but rather that this is my "character" that is multi-dimensional and complex.

Lastly, for those that like gritty games and fret somewhat that it is too hard to die in 4e, and that this diminished threat takes a little out of the game: this is a nice way to start a game and let the characters know that they are indeed vulnerable. *Not all players want this type of game*, but many do.

I've used some dream sequences where the players fought to the death against forces that hunted them -- they didn't know it was a dream of course. You could call this ultimate railroading as well I suppose. But it worked splendidly and added further dimension to the story and the psyche of the PC. The players loved it as well.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

There have been tons of movies where the "hero" is over taken, but the manner in which he fights back gave him a lot of choice/respect/freedom of spirit. In some way, being willing to fight back against terrible odds is much more reflective of real choice than knowing that you are generally safe. I would hope that with some good rolling and no fear, the PC's could take out some of the guards. Their actions do matter, and not only in the terms of "I win" or "I lose" but rather that this is my "character" that is multi-dimensional and complex.

Which is basically how I handled it: the actions the party took in the encounter in which they were captured had a direct effect upon how they escaped, who helped them along the way, and so forth.