Are PCs completely unpredictable?

[Quasqueton]

When you create a major encounter, do you try to predict/figure how the PCs will approach, take on, and overcome the challenge? Even if you don't consciously *try* to predict/figure it out, do you find yourself thinking it over anyway?

If/when you do try to predict/figure out the PCs' actions, how often are you even somewhat correct?

I have been giving some thought to how the PCs would handle a given encounter or situation. I usually did this just so when something happened, I'd have already given some thought to how to adjudicate it.

For instance, if the party had regularly tried parley and social skills to get past obstacles in most of their previous encounters, I'd give thought to how such an approach would work in the upcoming encounter.

If the only way into the room with the BBEG was through one door, and the BBEG would probably know the PCs are coming, how would he cast spells? What would he buff with first?

Etc.

I just tried to have thought through the common or most expected situations, so I wouldn't be caught flat-footed or blind when the situation happened. Way back, in my earlier DMing days, I didn't really do this much. I just flew by the seat of my pants with little to no forethought at all.

In the last several years, I've figured that I could be a better DM if I'd think through some things before the stuff hit the fan in the middle of the action. I even thought of interesting things for the BBEG to say when the party encountered him in the way I expected (based on their previous actions).

But since I've started doing this, I've learned that I absolutely cannot predict how the PCs will act in any situation. And I don't mean they sometimes surprise me, or they occassionally pull an unpredictable stunt -- I mean they don't do *anything* the way I expected, and nothing about the encounter goes the way I figured. This is not to say the encounter doesn't go fun or exciting, usually it is, at least from my view point. But I've wasted a lot of pre-thought on situations that don't happen.

If the party usually kicks in the door and kills the monster and takes its stuff, and I plan for that tactic in the Orc and Pie adventure, it turns out that the PCs stop and want to parley with the orc.

If the party usually negotiates with every creature they encounter, and I plan for that talky-stuff in the Orc and Pie adventure, it turns out that the PCs charge in and slaughter the orc.

And its not like this stuff happens because the party is psychotic or chaotic. Half the time, it's for some perfectly reasonable thought process -- some convergence of clues or ideas that, though wrong, taken out of context, or just weird, makes sense when seen at the right angle. (But then there's the other half of the time when their whole thought process makes no sense, and they are left saying, "I don't know why we did it like that.")

So I've given up trying to predict or prepare ahead of time for what the PCs will probably do. But I'm wondering if my experience is the norm. Can you reliably predict how the PCs in your game will approach a scenario? Or are PCs, by the nature of the game, always completely unpredictable?

Quasqueton

 

[demiurge1138]

I can usually predict what my PCs are going to do, because I know what motivates them after a while. There are some players that usually try to talk their way out of a situation, there are some that charge in guns-a-blazin', there are some that try to tactically disassemble every fight, and so on.

Of course, players can make decisions that throw your predictions in a loop, but I tend to look for trends and plan accordingly than make concrete plans.

Demiurge out.

 

[the Jester]

Well, I have gotten fairly good over the years at predicting these things, but they still throw me for a loop as often as not.

 

[Steverooo]

Instead of planning for "talky-stuff" or "fight", plan for both. Then, regardless of which way they jump, you're ready for either option.

I can generally predict my players, but they're always inventing new things to do. You can't always predict how they'll jump, but by knowing their classes, abilities, skills, magic items, spell lists, etc., you can make lotsa good guesses!

 

[DragonLancer]

I know my players very well and I can think through what they would say and do quite accurately. Sometimes they surprise me and that makes it more interesting.

 

[Nomad4life]

My players pretty consistently:



1. Cannot solve the easiest, most painfully simplistic puzzles that a brain-dead gopher would solve in three seconds or less on accident. Even if point-blank told what to do through NPCs, the party still gets hopelessly stuck. If an assassin is standing over his latest victim holding the bloody knife, the party will take two whole sessions to figure out that he was guilty of murder, and what the murder weapon was.



2. The party figures out the most intricate, devious, and difficult puzzles, traps, and plot twists without even realizing they were supposed to be challenges. Riddles that involve math or cryptology, they solve in their heads without even bothering with scratch paper. They prepare for, and correctly anticipate, betrayals from the most unlikely sources. They figure out who the-guy-behind-it-all is within minutes of meeting him/her for the first time… Or figure out that someone has been charmed/mind controlled without ever having met them before.



I used to think that there was something about my DMing style that was causing this phenomenan… But no. They seem to do this no matter who is running the show. Ultimately, the players always have a good time and consider the adventures challenging… But seldom for the reasons the adventure was supposed to be. It can be infuriating, but you just have to laugh about it.



To answer your question, I suppose that my players ARE predictable; they will ALWAYS do something unpredictable!

 

[Philip]

If the party usually kicks in the door and kills the monster and takes its stuff, and I plan for that tactic in the Orc and Pie adventure, it turns out that the PCs stop and want to parley with the orc.

If the party usually negotiates with every creature they encounter, and I plan for that talky-stuff in the Orc and Pie adventure, it turns out that the PCs charge in and slaughter the orc.

If an encounter is random, I expect the PCs to react in a random fashion. If an encounter has meaning to the PCs, I expect them to react in a meaningful fashion.

I would have no idea what the party would do if they encountered the Orc'n'Pie situation you mentioned, since it is essentially random.

On the other hand, if eating the Pie would cure a plague that the father of one the PCs contracted, I would expect them to parley. If the Orc had killed one of the PCs father, I would expect them to fight. Different meanings, different reactions.

I try to predict meaningful encounters, but not random ones. On the whole I can predict the PCs actions with about 80% accuracy. But this is considering I put a lot of forks in adventures as well. With forks I mean different choices I offer to the PCs in handling an encounter, with the explicit intention that I don't know what choice they are going to make beforehand. Keeps things exciting for me as well.

 

[Shallown]

I don't plan for what they may do though I think I can't help but Guess how they will react. I concern myself more with setting up encounters/events that offer at least three answers or choices. They may not always be nice choices but choices that are acceptable. This way I avoid railroading or tieing my own hands too much. Now often they will come up with a 4th solution but I don't worry as much about that since I tend to free style most of the campaign and spend time inbetween tightening up the plot around the characters actions instead of trying to guide them. Honestly this isn't so much a concern for railroading as a means to keep me engaged in the game. If I know how things are going to turn out I don't have much motivation for running things.

later


PS
As a player I am very unpredictable it is odd what things I will sink my teeth into and what I ignore.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I can generally anticipate what my players wil do on a "macro" level, but not so much on a "micro" level. So, I'll have a good idea that they plan on going to a particular dungeon/city/island/etc. but I won't know how they'll proceed when they get there.

My approach as DM is to set up the routines of the location and that will allow me to adapt to what the players do. Watch schedules, movements of major NPC's, timeline of events. Once I have that, I can roll with the punches.

 

[Slobber Monster]

My players' motivations are usually pretty consistent - they are driven entirely by greed and cowardice. So it's usually not very hard for me to predict what they're going to do. The few big suprises they've pulled on me actually happened because I expected them to behave more nobly. Fortunately it's easy for me to have fun with greedy players since they can be baited so effortlessly.