Arresting the PCs

I'm of the belief that anything in which the PCs have no control should not be presented as a scene but rather summarized. Whether they are started off as in custody or "poisoned" or what have you, if it is presented as a scene in which the players have input then the GM is giving the impression that their input matters. Sometimes scenarios where the PCs begin in captivity can be fun, if there is truly a chance for the PCs to regain their freedom through their own action and ingenuity, but it wears thin if done too often and is a lot less fun if the players are duped into believing they have some way to avoid being taken captive.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

i stil say it should play out in an encounter i like how he's gonna handle it with the guard poisoning. id rather play through a hopeless encounter than have the dm arbitrarily say you were captured.
 

i stil say it should play out in an encounter i like how he's gonna handle it with the guard poisoning. id rather play through a hopeless encounter than have the dm arbitrarily say you were captured.

The problem comes when you decide to play it out at the table, but insist on one particular outcome.

Let's take the poisoning scenario, for example. The drinks will be poisoned with a Fortitude DC (20 + highest Fort save in the group) save of fall unconscious. Easy right?

All the players still get a save and succeed on a 20. What happens if one or more PCs still save?

What about PCs that refuse the drink?

What about if cleric proposes to bless the table and casts either Detect Poison or Purify Food and Drink?


And that doesn't even touch on the ramifications to the world.

What happens when the PCs want to acquire such a poison for their own use? If a lowly guard could afford to use it surely the PCs can get it?
 

i stil say it should play out in an encounter i like how he's gonna handle it with the guard poisoning. id rather play through a hopeless encounter than have the dm arbitrarily say you were captured.

You know, maybe he should give them a chance to make it fair and maybe not so pointless.

"While Bob falls green on the floor, you all hear loud noises from the outside. You have 1 round to act before the guards storm the inn. "
 

or... maybe they figure out they were poisoned and have so many turns to figure a way to stay safe until they can wake up. but since were talking about knocked out i vote we begin saying drugged instead poisoned makes it seem like trying a tpk instead of ebginning an adventure. but to the dm seems liek they could have just as much fun avoiding going to jail as they could in running your adventure in jail. its why i never preplan adventures. whenever i do y players mes it up and i get mad. just go with the flow. remember as the dm its not ur job to keep them on track to play your game. just to make sure they have fun playing. when it comes down to it i know as a dm id rather have my adventure ruined and my frineds smiling than my adventure play out just how i might have wanted and my friends pissed off/not wanting me to dm again. trust me one guy usurped my campaign and he was a horrible tyrant dm. finally we rebelled. three other players all said if he didnt let me dm again then they werent going to play. i got to dm again he went back to being a player and everyone was happy
 

What about PCs that refuse the drink?
This seems like a weird question to me. This would only happen if you make an issue of it. Part of being a DM is social engineering. Your NPCs cannot make diplomacy rolls to "force" players to like them -- you have to play your NPC as genuinely enjoyable to be around, if you wish the players to perceive the NPC that way. If you wish to pull a bluff, you have to be reasonably good at real-world bluffing. And so on.

Since it's the job, I've gotten fairly decent at it. So for me, I'd gloss over the details to play it off like a standard taken-for-granted event. That way it's a fait accompli. Like this:

DM: The sun is setting. What do you wish to do about food & sleep?

Players: Find an inn.

DM: Okay, sure. The innkeeper offers you rooms, two choices: each pay individually for meals and rooms at the standard rates in the Player's Handbook, or if you're going to be around for a while, he'll give you a group deal but you have to pay in advance. It's 25 gold pieces for all of you for 3 days, meals included.

Players: Uh, that's a savings, so we'll take the 3 days for 25 gold.

DM: Okay. You spend the night. The dinner meal is tasty, and unless you have any last-minute stuff to do, we can fast-forward to the next morning.

Players: We're good.

DM: Great. When you awaken, you are surprised to find yourselves in a jail cell, unless your character can make a DC 15 Fortitude save and a DC 16 Will save.

Players: Whaaaat? Hey! One of us made the saves!

DM: Okay, lucky player, you awaken in the morning to find your allies gone. Everyone else, you find yourselves in jail.

It's like a bait & switch. I call attention to the deal they're getting on the inn rates so that they are not paying attention to the fact that they took for granted that they ate the innkeeper's food and slept at his inn. Once I have their buy-in that they accepted the scenario without suspicion, I throw 'em into the action.

After all, eating at the inn and spending the night is something that plays out millions of times in millions of D&D games all over the world. It's absolutely unremarkable. So the only reason that a player would decide not to eat the poisoned food is if you called attention to it. Why would a DM sabotage his own event like that?

(By the way, that's a DC 15 Fort save for Oil of taggit planted into their meals, and a DC 16 Will save for a Deep Slumber spell cast by someone with +3 to their spellcasting stat. Redundancy for the win. And no, I wouldn't tell them "Oil of taggit was planted in your food." I would just make sure that *I* knew it and was aware that the solution was reasonable, so that if they found out, they would see it as plausible themselves.)

What happens when the PCs want to acquire such a poison for their own use? If a lowly guard could afford to use it surely the PCs can get it?
Yes. Good point. Anything the DM uses is fair game for others to use, and if the DM denies it, he or she can expect trouble at the table. So for me, I try to find other ways to handle these things. For example, it seems eminently fair to use quests -- after all, the PCs get them, so it's reasonable for NPCs to get 'em too. The PCs killed guards, so a quest is awarded to a local NPC hero: 500 gold pieces for each captured member of the murderous gang. A solo wizard at level 9 might hear that and think, "Hmm, if that's 2000 or 2500 for all of them, it might be worth casting a few spells...."

Later, the PCs are asleep at an inn. The NPC wizard uses Dimension Door to accurately and silently beam himself into the room of the PC rumored to be the most weak-willed. He casts something debilitating on the PC, maybe even 2 things if necessary -- deep slumber, hold person, charm monster, and so on. Stuff that's a little bit overkill for lower-level PCs, but still reasonable for a 2500 gp reward. And since he's beaming directly into each PC's room while they sleep, he should probably be able to get at least the first spell off without resistance.

Once he's done some good work to incapacitate a PC, he ties the PC up, gags the PC, disarms/disrobes the PC, etc. Rinse & repeat with each PC, working toward the most resistant PCs near the end (the ones with good will or fortitude saves). Then he turns them in without delay. He doesn't want his spells to wear off if he can help it. He may have even alerted the guards to his plan, so that the guards can just run into the inn and pick up the PCs like packaged goods.

Depending upon how mean you wish to be, and how simulationist you wish to be, you can even have the wizard keep their stuff. After all, that's what the PCs do when they defeat something. However, while that would make it much easier to justify in terms of why a high-level NPC would take the job, it also will infuriate the players at the table. So be careful with that last bit.

Nonetheless, this will come across as much more palatable to the players, especially if you give them back all/most of their loot. After all, getting a quest seems fair & normal for players, so players are able to swallow the bitter pill when you say, "Well, those in power gave a quest to capture villains. Sadly, you took on the villain role when you killed some guards. You're on the "bad guy" side right now. You'll have to work your way back."

I did this once. I had a fun time, and the players had an "okay" time. They weren't thrilled about getting caught, but also, they enjoyed getting input. I did it like this: I didn't want any player to know what was happening, so I set up a gauntlet of game tables for them to run through. First, everyone sat in my dining room. Nearby is a sliding door to the yard. I invited one player outside, explained what was happening, rolled dice in front of them, and had them respond/react, if the dice allowed it. Then, if the PC was captured, I asked the player to head over to another door in my home that led to a 2nd table. I had a battlemat, chips, and sodas out on that table. They sat & waited while I ran the next player through it.

The first couple of players were caught so easily that nothing came of it. However, the 3rd player awakened/resisted and while he was quickly subdued, the player made it clear that he was screaming bloody murder for his allies. I opened the sliding door and said to those who had yet to come outside, "This player would like to tell you something." He then leaned in and said, "We're getting attacked by guards, get your characters ready to fight!" I then sent him to the other table with those captured.

The remaining 2 players were much more difficult to capture. One ran into the other's room and they ganged up on the guards. They killed a few but were brought down. Once they were down, we all walked over to the 2nd room, joined our friends, and played out the rest of the story from there. Everyone was sorta mellow/bummed for getting caught, but also, since they each had a different experience, there was a lot of talking and sharing of "war stories" as they each recounted what had happened. It was pretty fun after that, and certainly memorable.
 
Last edited:

[MENTION=44797]aboyd[/MENTION],

Sure, in the scenario you present, it would be unusual for any in the group not to eat (but I'll come back to that in a minute).

That's not the scenario presented however.

Thanks for the ideas/advice everyone. I think what I'll do is (instead of using nonlethal damage) have an undercover guard meet them in the local tavern late at night and poison their drinks, then have more guards move in after they've drank the poison.

So, a group on the run after killing guards is approached by someone in the bar late at night who offers them a drink. A lot of groups I've been part of in the past would view the situation a bit more ctritically than that of innocently staying at an inn after a trouble-free day. In fact, many characters I've seen in play would want a clear head in case trouble develops and would refuse a drink from anyone in that situation.

Now, back to your scenario. Having the cleric "bless the meal" with a Purify Food and Drink is reasonably common practice for groups I've run. I've also had groups that kept split schedules for eating and sleeping, other groups where the woodsy characters preferred naturally gathered foods and rarely ate "civilised pap", groups that survived off of iron rations and Create Food and Water despite how unappetising both are.
 

It's like a bait & switch. I call attention to the deal they're getting on the inn rates so that they are not paying attention to the fact that they took for granted that they ate the innkeeper's food and slept at his inn. Once I have their buy-in that they accepted the scenario without suspicion, I throw 'em into the action.

After all, eating at the inn and spending the night is something that plays out millions of times in millions of D&D games all over the world. It's absolutely unremarkable. So the only reason that a player would decide not to eat the poisoned food is if you called attention to it. Why would a DM sabotage his own event like that?

(By the way, that's a DC 15 Fort save for Oil of taggit planted into their meals, and a DC 16 Will save for a Deep Slumber spell cast by someone with +3 to their spellcasting stat. Redundancy for the win. And no, I wouldn't tell them "Oil of taggit was planted in your food." I would just make sure that *I* knew it and was aware that the solution was reasonable, so that if they found out, they would see it as plausible themselves.)

Re: Oil of taggit:

1) DC 15 isn't tough. Even if all the characters are 1st level, you should reasonably expect 50-60% casualities at best (assuming a balanced group). At 3rd or better level, you may take down a rogue of arcane caster. The clerics and fighters have probably about a 2/3 chance of remaining upright.

2) The people affected won't make it to their rooms -- they'll fall over at the table about a minute after ingesting the food. That will may the rest of the PCs somewhat suspicious.

Can it be done? Sure! Are there tools to do it? Absolutely. The oil isn't a gret first choice though and cost the poor guard 90 gp / person for the attempt.
 

That's not the scenario presented however.
OK, let me rephrase then. I don't get the sense that this DM will doggedly insist on a suboptimal scenario that gives away the ruse when the DM in question is asking for improvements. And that is what I'm advocating. Especially considering that the described failing scenario is a mere 1 degree of separation away from my described winning scenario. All that needs to change? The guards need to talk to the innkeeper instead of the PCs. Guards alter the drinks, innkeeper serves meal. Voila. Business as usual.

Re: Oil of taggit:

1) DC 15 isn't tough.
I didn't suggest it was: I suggested having to beat a 15 fort followed by a 16 will might, in my made-up scenario, beat most (but not all) of a bunch of low-level PCs. And to test it out, I just ran 8 PCs I recently made through the rolls. In my first party of 4, 1 passed both. In my second party of 4, 1 passed both. So, that played out pretty much exactly as I portrayed it.

As for Oil of Taggit causing them to fall asleep within a minute and thus alert the party, that's a good point, but merely a speed bump in front of an off-the-cuff suggestion. As a DM, there are creative ways to handle that.

"It's a slow-acting Oil of Taggit."

"It's a special Oil of Taggit with a DC of 20. Costs more."

"It wasn't Oil of Taggit. There was a bard providing entertainment. It was Fascinate and Suggestion."

"It wasn't a bard. It was an invisible, silenced wizard who cast a silent Bestow Curse that merely cursed you to sleep soundly through whatever might happen that night."

"It wasn't a wizard..."

Let's not lose sight of the forest for all the trees. Let's focus on the spirit of my point: there are a million low-level ways to capture PCs that do not involve them feeling unjustly broadsided, do not involve obscene expenses, and do not involve cheating the rules so badly that the DM will rue the day the players try the same thing. The ways to capture them can involve simple means that any DM will be all right to share with the players, so that they can adopt the same strategy without breaking the game world.

As for the 90 gp cost being too much for the guards: seriously? Guards were killed and their employer is pissed, but the employer is going to shrug and tell the guards to acquire extra resources from their own pockets? Isn't access to resources one of the reasons to affiliate with a lord or other noble that can raise funds through taxation? The guards aren't paying out of their own pockets. Why? Because you're the DM, and in your game world, the noble in charge paid, using his modest but certainly decent resources.

If the noble can afford a 500 gp bounty per head, the noble can afford Oil of Taggit.

tl;dr: let's not pre-ruin the plots with the anticipation that the players would have ruined them anyway. They'll ruin plenty without our help. I present the scenario with a poker face, and when they buy in, plot twists happen.
 

party in Inn/resteraunt, bounty hunter (rogue/sorecerer or rogue/warlock or rogue/psion) *charms the Innkeep and /or chef. The bounty hunter wants to use his rogue skills coupled with his magic to capture the party. Avoiding the blades of this band of wolves in sheeps clothing at all costs. He has already heard how murdurous & viciuos they trully are. So he prepares a nice little ambush for them.

he poisons food with a slow acting paralysis poison, something they wont notice for 10 minutes, this will give them time to consume multiple doses and force multiple saves. Also the drinks will have a sleep pioson. Paralyses and sleeping 1 in the drink 1 in the food...the nice pine smell coming from the fireplace is a oil that gives a -2 to pioson saves but is harmless in and of itself.

the party will have to make multiple saves vs the poison they drink 1 for each dose, and possible multiple saves for how many doses they take from the food. All at a -2 do to the pleasant smelling non toxic special oil put on the wood in the fireplace. You could further the penalty by-1 for any pc drinking booze/beer/wine as the alcohol acts as a synergy bonus to the sleep/para.

the pison may be weak because its cheap, but consuming multiple doses could also raise the DC for each dose after the 1st. Remember you cannot ask the party to roll saves as they are eating. You will make them paranoid. You simply count the doses of food and drink. Have a newly engaged couple giving toasts, multiple of spirits. And after the 10 minutes ask the party members to roll a d20 X amount of times each...dont even tell them what happens...they all just awake bound in a prison!
 

Remove ads

Top