DMs Advice - Player's bad assumptions

[Omegaxicor]

Now firstly I know that 99% of bad player assumptions are down to poor DM planning (maybe not 99% but a portion, to be determined later) but there are times where players see something and latch on to it and go in the wrong direction. An example of this is:

"You enter a Dwarven Stronghold that has been taken over by a Human Archmage a century or so ago. You reach a large door, immediately the whole room glows red and Earth Elementals begin to appear (in rising numbers and in power)"

now you have two options:

1) Fight 10 waves of enemies
OR
2) Use Knowledge (Arcana) to try to unlock the door
and the player's choice
3) Try Knowledge (Dungeoneering) (best I could think of off the top of my head) to try to see how the Dwarves would unlock the door. (and then I roll them a 1 openly or anything secretly)

Now the bad assumption is ASSUMING one way or the other but in this case assuming the trap is a security feature of the Dwarves and not the Archmage.

Now this is only an example but do I tell the players "No it's not a dwarven security system" flatly and without the usual DM's "you don't really know" edge OR do I just let them die in Earth Elementals? (or if there is a Player's Method (you know how they ALWAYS pick option 3) then I would still like to know what you would do to deal with this)

The players suffered through several pointless fights before expending a lot of resources and losing a party member before killing all the enemies, this meant that the Archmage was too strong for them and killed all but one party member (I fudged the second-to-last guys death because I didn't expect anyone to live and then the last guy rolls a 20 )

EDIT: throughout the thread the example became a large question which wasn't what I intended. The question is: if your players were stuck doing something in a corner and ignoring the door, do you say to them "There is nothing you can do with that focus more on the door that is unlocked and unguarded and waiting for you to go through for the past six hours! " or just let them stay in their corner figuring out what to do with the corner?

 

[Argyle King]

I'm a little unsure of why it would matter if the elementals were put there by the Dwarves or the Archmage. I do believe there would (likely) be clues to suggest one or the other if you wanted it to be possible to tell which was the case; for example, instead of just glowing red, the room might have Dwarven runes which glow red or arcane Runes which glow red.

Beyond that, it seems to me that it would be player choice to figure out what the proper way to handle the situation is. The only assumption I see possibly being a problem is that the 10 waves of enemies will be assumed to be the traditional balanced fight which tends to be assumed in modern D&D. If so, that seems like a classic example of player assumptions being not exactly the same as DM assumptions, and such things can be avoided by just talking about the expected playstyle before the game begins.

If fights are "pointless," I have to question why they are there.

 

[Omegaxicor]

they are there as a distraction to the players while they make Arcana checks to dispel the magic to open the door.

That's exactly my point is that there are runes that the players don't understand, they roll a Knowledge (Dungeoneering) check to decipher the Dwarven runes (except they aren't Dwarven they are Arcane) and never think to check if the runes are Arcane.

The 10 waves was a nice easy number the players don't know the trap only has materials to summon 10 waves, it could have had materials to summon 250 small, 150 medium and 50 large earth elementals for all they know.

but the example may be a bad one, the party make an assumption and try to save themselves but the assumption is wrong and they continue to try ideas that aren't what they need to do to conquer the simple lock, how do you deal with this? (I'm guessing from your answer it hasn't come up)

 

[Savage Wombat]

Every time they defeat a wave, reward them with a hint of some sort. The puzzle should, in abstract, get easier with each wave. If I were building the scenario, I'd find a mechanical way to reflect this in the trap itself.

 

[MarkB]

they are there as a distraction to the players while they make Arcana checks to dispel the magic to open the door.

That's exactly my point is that there are runes that the players don't understand, they roll a Knowledge (Dungeoneering) check to decipher the Dwarven runes (except they aren't Dwarven they are Arcane) and never think to check if the runes are Arcane.

The 10 waves was a nice easy number the players don't know the trap only has materials to summon 10 waves, it could have had materials to summon 250 small, 150 medium and 50 large earth elementals for all they know.

Logically, any check result sufficient to answer the question "how does this dwarven security system work?" would be plenty to provide the information "this is clearly not a dwarven security system". By providing that simple answer you dispel the players' assumption.

And if their check result was insufficient, then they would've failed anyway, even if their assumption was correct.

I'll also point out that Knowledge checks are, by their nature, passive checks - they're a check to see whether or not the character knows something. Even if the player, hearing your description, thinks the runes are dwarven, his character will still recognise them as arcane runes if he's seen their like before. The player should automatically get to roll a check using the correct Knowledge skill the moment he says his character is examining the runes.

but the example may be a bad one, the party make an assumption and try to save themselves but the assumption is wrong and they continue to try ideas that aren't what they need to do to conquer the simple lock, how do you deal with this? (I'm guessing from your answer it hasn't come up)

Try telling the players "You're proceeding under a false assumption. I know it was a few sessions ago, but do you remember that scene where <insert assumption-busting information>..."

If you feel that that's too metagamey, ask them all to make Intelligence checks first, then tell the above to whoever rolled highest.

 

[Omegaxicor]

to the best of my knowledge,Knowledge checks are "you looking at something and thinking back to when you could have learned or heard about such things" they are active checks. I guess you could say "Do I know anything about these runes" and just have an untrained knowledge check with a passive bonus for training but that is VERY different from the system in place (I suppose it helps to say we play 3.5 but it doesn't really change anything)

MarkB thinks telling the players flatly "These aren't Dwarven they are Arcane runes moron" is the best approach, right?
[MENTION=1932]Savage Wombat[/MENTION] I would really like to have something like that in place but what hints can you give in some situations? (to me, and I may be wrong, that goes back to "These are Arcane runes" after defeating Wave 1...which isn't wrong/right it is just an opinion. If I have misunderstood, tell me how to subtly tell the players that they have misinterpreted something obvious)

 

[Tonguez]

nah MarkB is right you say "on examination of the door lock you can see that the mechanism and runes aren't of dwarf design, they have an arcane feel to them"

or

"you are unable to determine a method to unlock the door but perhaps the surrounding brick work can be dug out and weakened - given enough time, which the eldritch rumbling of elementals suggest you don't have..."

 

[Omegaxicor]

I really like the last one but the first, to me, does sound very "yea, do that", which may not be bad but it seems strange.

I will have to remember that in the future

 

[MarkB]

to the best of my knowledge,Knowledge checks are "you looking at something and thinking back to when you could have learned or heard about such things" they are active checks. I guess you could say "Do I know anything about these runes" and just have an untrained knowledge check with a passive bonus for training but that is VERY different from the system in place (I suppose it helps to say we play 3.5 but it doesn't really change anything)

Quoting from the 3.5e SRD:

Action
Usually none. In most cases, making a Knowledge check doesn’t take an action—you simply know the answer or you don’t.

Try Again
No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.​

The check is to find out whether you know something. It does not represent any active effort of recollection.

 

[Omegaxicor]

interesting, I read that to mean that Knowledge checks don't mean looking through a book for something, just look and think, but you have to think about it.

I can't imagine that surface thoughts are enough to remember that 3000 year old Dwarven King's grand-nephew's name, you have to think "What did I learn in *here* (for example, "What did the old dwarven caretaker say about the family killed during the Great War" but it isn't something you learned an hour ago, it is for things months or years ago, or else you would have to roll a Knowledge check for "What did the old lady send us down here for?" so it won't be stuff you just know, you have to think about it...actually the more I think about it, it should take time