Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 9257554" data-attributes="member: 2629">It sounds a bit like you'd done some research in advance and knew you wanted to make that situation happen in the moment of sacrifice.  Did you foreshadow it?  Did you drop hints that could be seen in retrospect to indicate your 'take a hike with the One' might be there?  If so, you're doing exactly what I advocated for ... if not, we'll come back to it once we hit a few points.As a starting point - you stole the PC's thunder.   They decided to make the sacrifice play, and you took it away.  You overwrote the story they were trying to craft.  They had set their character up for a memorable and meaningful exist ... and you took away their choice.  That redirection is a bit like planning to take your significant other to a concert you've been waiting to see, only to have that significant other surprise you with a surprise party with all your friends ... forcing you to miss the concert that you wanted to see.  Sure, you do the polite thing and try to enjoy the night ... but there is a sense of loss for missing the thing that you wanted.  Let's say that the player didn't come back.  That character's ending is lost.  They're still floating out there.  You took away closure.However, they did come back.  And they now have a precedent set for them: If I make the sacrifice play the DM will save me.  All the players have that precedent set.  So, if a situation arises where they can sacrifice for the good of others, it lacks meaning.  It is diminished.  When the players have reason to believe you'll save them from their luck, their bad decisions, or heck - even when they intentionally make the sacrifice play ... it all loses meaning.  This is the crux of why this deus ex machina approach hurts the games.I'm going to assume you didn't foreshadow this move - because if you did, it would be an example of setting it up as I advocated from the start.  How would foreshadowing and setting this up change the situation.  How would it alter the criticism I placed above.First, let's address the feeling of loss from having their plan stolen.  He still had a plan, it still didn't go as he expected.  So why is it different just because it was foreshadowed?  Because they can see the story in retrospect and see that they could have seen the twist coming had they had the right perspective.  The change will feel earned.  This is basic storytelling.  They see the twist as part of the story that they just didn't understand ... not something done to their character out of the blue.  There is a huge difference when you watch a movie and the hero is saved by something that was set up rather than when they are saved by something unexpected that was not set up.  Now let's address the expectation of being saved.  When the PCs look back at this in the future they'll see there were clues that it was possible.  They'll see that it was something that was part of the storytelling.  So, when the next situation occurs when they are in dire circumstances, they'll be looking for something that that will save them.  They won't just be expecting you to save them regardless with something out of the blue.  They'll still be looking for that way to win ... not just waiting for you to give them the win.  They remain the drivers of the story ... not recipients of it.Had I been running this situation and had the player indicated to me that they planned to make that sacrifice play in advance, and had the Biblical idea you introduced occur to me, I would have woven in the groundwork for the twist sessions in advance.  Then it would feel earned and would not have left the players feeling like we just handwaived and saved the PC for the future.If the player had indicated to me during the sacrificial session that he was about to make that sacrifice and had I had the sudden inspiration to use my Biblical knowledge to provide that ending - there is absolutely no way I step on his toes by overwriting his move and replacing his resolution with something I make up as a 'better' ending.  However, I might - as an attempted impartial DM - not allow his plan to succeed if there were reasons for it to fail (such as a misunderstanding of the religion, a bad roll of the dice on some part of the sacrifice play, etc...).  This could also rob him of his sacrifice in a different way ... but that doesn't steal the agency from the player.  It gives them a tragic end - a failed sacrifice that cost them their life, but doesn't give them the win ... leaving the other PCs to figure it out.   But, it doesn't overwrite what they did - it just didn't work out for them.  It is a harsh world sometimes when we make mistakes or luck runs against us.  Why is the potential of failing and dying for nothing better than having you give them your happy resolution?  Because it was their choice.  If you set things up, they shouldn't have been surprised by the possibility of failure - and they'll feel it as part of the story.  It will feel like an earned end.  I'm sure they'd much rather have the sacrifice work out in the favor of the PCs, but even when it doesn't, it feels like their story, not the one you gave them.So, the equivalent of a raise dead spell was known to be available (it seems it was known as you go straight to how the PCs proactively went to ask for it) ... and they persuaded an NPC to do it.  Again - that is not what I advocated against.  There was nothing done - after the fact and unearned - that bailed the PCs out.  They used the tools they knew to exist.  This is the equivalent of going to a church and accepting a quest from the cleric in exchange for a raise dead spell.  Had the ability to revise your PC been introduced after your death and had that Archivist been introduced to be nearby so that you could get your PC back right away ... that would be what I am advocating against. However, this seems to be pretty run of the mill 'playing with the toys they've been given', unless I am missing something.I do not expect to actually enlighten you.  The ones more likely to benefit from the discussion are others that are not so biased in their views.  Others can read these discussions and decide what they think of the situations.  With that being said, I don't think either of us will have anything new to offer beyond what we've said.</blockquote>

Verification