D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[hawkeyefan]

And if, when the scenario gets replayed, they double down on their previous methods - what then?

I mean, if I'm a player there - assuming my character has the same memories of this "dream" as do I the player - I already know what's going to work to get me freed and when the best time will be to do it; only this time I'm planning ahead so as to even more efficiently take down the guards.

Either that, or for those key bits they really do have to follow*, don't give them any escape hatches. Here, I think a better option would have been to capture them, have the shadowy figure give them the mission, then gas them all to sleep and have them awaken the next morning in a safe leafy glade ten miles out of town. From there, they're on their own and can approach the mission - or not - as they like.

* - having one of these lead-'em-by-the-nose bits happen infrequently is, IMO, fair game; but always err on the side of caution as it's something that can very easily be overdone.

Right. This game doesn't seem particularly concerned with agency, and the goal of the OP is how to fix this problem. It even went as far as suggesting time travel. So my answer wasn't concerned about agency.


I'd just back up to the point where things went haywire, and then start again. I'd offer another route to avoid the mess. I mean, this game has a heavy handed plot... the PCs are framed for murder, surrender into custody, can't escape, and then a mysterious stranger shows up and offers freedom if they do something for him. Oh, and they're magically bound to do it, of course! They agree... then they get caught escaping.

That's the problem right there. The only freedom the players have is to alert the guards to their escape. That's the one thing they're allowed to do. Why not have the mysterious stranger teleport them out, or reveal a hidden passage, or whatever? Nope! Let's see if the players can somehow make things worse for their characters!

So, to me, the issue is that misplaced freedom. Either let them make choices that actually matter and may improve their situation, or else don't let them make choices. But don't give them only enough choice to screw up. I don't see how that does any good.

 

[kenada]

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.


This is not a problem in my Hard Fun Old School Unfair Unbalance style games. So here is what happened over the weekend:

Another DM could not make it to his game, so he asked me to cover for him. He gave me his notes, but we had no time to chat. So it's an urban set game, I'm not sure it it's published or homebrew as I only had his notes. Last game the PCs did a task for an NPC, and the game ended at a big party. This game picks up at the party. The players have fun for a bit and then the plot kicks off: the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail. They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot, later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards. So this is the good city where a lot of the rest of the game is set, going by the notes. And the PCs getting arrested for falsely killing the NPC, that they could have been found innocent for, does not even matter now. The PCs have now just become the worst mass murderers in city history killing many guards and such.

The players never give any of this role playing any thought. They are LOCKED into the idea that ANY combat encounter MUST be a murderhobo slaughter fest to the death. A guard hits them with a net, they must use thier most deadly weapons, spells and abilities to do a ton of damage and slaughter the guard.

After the slaughter fest, the PCs flee the city and go to hide in some caves. And this ends the adventure for the night. Of course, next game brings up the problem: what will the city do about the most vile and evil mass murderers in all of history. Sure you could just ignore it. But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking. They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

So, anyone?

How were the situations (re: arrest) presented to the players? When was initiative rolled?

I’ve noticed that modern games have conditioned players to treat initiative as the start of a fight that is balanced for them, they should be fighting, and can be won. If any of those assumptions are not true, bad outcomes usually result. That seems like a particularly likely failure point when there are multiple DMs where those assumptions hold for one but not the other.

 

[kenada]

I’ve been thinking about possible solutions to the problem presented. Given how many people they’ve killed already, actually taking down the PCs is likely to cost quite a bit of blood and treasure. Assuming the goal is to get things back on track for the other DM to resume running, one approach would be to offer the PCs a pardon in exchange for completing a suicide mission. That sets them up for an adventure, and if they do succeed, they took care of a major problem for the town. Individual people might still be upset with them or distrust them, but at least the campaign can get back up on track.

 

[Vaalingrade]

In an actual medieval setting--which D&D patently and clearly is not--a bunch of nutbars running roughshod over the town's defenders means those guys just got themselves a new town unless it matters enough to someone else to come take it back.

This is how you get kings.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.


This is not a problem in my Hard Fun Old School Unfair Unbalance style games. So here is what happened over the weekend:

Another DM could not make it to his game, so he asked me to cover for him. He gave me his notes, but we had no time to chat. So it's an urban set game, I'm not sure it it's published or homebrew as I only had his notes. Last game the PCs did a task for an NPC, and the game ended at a big party. This game picks up at the party. The players have fun for a bit and then the plot kicks off: the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail. They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot, later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards. So this is the good city where a lot of the rest of the game is set, going by the notes. And the PCs getting arrested for falsely killing the NPC, that they could have been found innocent for, does not even matter now. The PCs have now just become the worst mass murderers in city history killing many guards and such.

The players never give any of this role playing any thought. They are LOCKED into the idea that ANY combat encounter MUST be a murderhobo slaughter fest to the death. A guard hits them with a net, they must use thier most deadly weapons, spells and abilities to do a ton of damage and slaughter the guard.

After the slaughter fest, the PCs flee the city and go to hide in some caves. And this ends the adventure for the night. Of course, next game brings up the problem: what will the city do about the most vile and evil mass murderers in all of history. Sure you could just ignore it. But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking. They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

So, anyone?

OK, so you trap the PCs in a situation which you believe is supposed to be a setup for a plot hook, and then instead of executing the plot hook, you basically throw them into what looks exactly like a combat situation, against a bunch of NPCs that are already holding them for a crime by didn't commit, and you're surprised that they reacted this way? The lesson is DON'T SUBVERT YOUR OWN PLOT HOOKS. If you are going to run a game where the PCs are led around in this sort of railroady kind of setups, then EXECUTE THE BLINKING RAILROAD, don't start tossing random dice and mess it up halfway through! The shadowy figure shows up, scene over, the PCs have escaped and are on to the next station of the railroad. Its not a bad technique, you just have to do it right!

As for fixing it? Yeah, the egg is broken, you will have to make an omelet now...

 

[Baron Opal II]

I've had a fair bit of success with murder mysteries, but the PCs were in the detective role, not framed target role.

It seems like the DM was expecting the PCs to go quietly to jail (which they did), interact with the Mysterious Stranger and accept the Bargain (which they did), escape with the Stranger's help (which they botched), and leave the guards none the wiser (they all died). Furthermore, these guards were regular folk doing their jobs protecting the people of Townburg and not minions of the Sinister Ruler. At first blush, anyway. And, if that is true and the PCs do go back to town in disguise, there would certainly be the State funeral for the guards, parade / mass viewing of the town's "brave fallen defenders", eulogies, &c. A town in shock trying to recover from the initial murder and the subsequent slaughter of Townburg's Finest by the vile perpetrators.

At this point, I would need to understand the Mysterious Stranger's plans. Are they completely borked by the PC's actions? Is there a reason why the Stranger can't meet the PCs at the cave and say "well, you guys botched that, but here's your job. Maybe in a couple weeks things will calm down."? There's only so many people in the guard, less now, and only so many places they can search in a given time. If the scenario is Do the Thing within the city walls that will be difficult. If they are discovered within the city walls, they will be undoubtedly terminated with extreme prejudice.

If they need to go back to town, bad things will happen.

If they need to go back to town to stop the plot they were framed for, the villain's plan will likely succeed if the PCs just skip town or the scenario doesn't require them to go there.

If they can do the mission without going back to town, they can move to another town after. How much effort will really be expended to chase them? If Wanted posters are a thing, that could be an interesting complication moving forward.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Cool. I have no qualms against that at other tables. Plays out too immature and directionless in my experience, I prefer to have a more specific experience than a free for all. Though, I respect your choices. OP needs to decide if thats what they want. I suspect it isnt otherwise they wouldnt be asking for advice.

See, if at this point the players or the GM don't want to to play it that way, then campaign's over in my view. To do otherwise is to ignore the consequences of the player's choices. TTRPGs don't have save points, generally speaking. You keep going from where you are or you call it.

 

[payn]

See, if at this point the players or the GM don't want to to play it that way, then campaign's over in my view. To do otherwise is to ignore the consequences of the player's choices. TTRPGs don't have save points, generally speaking. You keep going from where you are or you call it.

Exactly. Either you toss your ideas into the wind and go on the players whims, or you need a reset with a detailed session zero and discussion about expectations. Neither is the best/only way to do it, but thinking you can reset a campaign that went off the rails in game, is usually a recipe for disaster.

 

[Laurefindel]

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.


This is not a problem in my Hard Fun Old School Unfair Unbalance style games. So here is what happened over the weekend:

Another DM could not make it to his game, so he asked me to cover for him. He gave me his notes, but we had no time to chat. So it's an urban set game, I'm not sure it it's published or homebrew as I only had his notes. Last game the PCs did a task for an NPC, and the game ended at a big party. This game picks up at the party. The players have fun for a bit and then the plot kicks off: the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail. They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot, later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards. So this is the good city where a lot of the rest of the game is set, going by the notes. And the PCs getting arrested for falsely killing the NPC, that they could have been found innocent for, does not even matter now. The PCs have now just become the worst mass murderers in city history killing many guards and such.

The players never give any of this role playing any thought. They are LOCKED into the idea that ANY combat encounter MUST be a murderhobo slaughter fest to the death. A guard hits them with a net, they must use thier most deadly weapons, spells and abilities to do a ton of damage and slaughter the guard.

After the slaughter fest, the PCs flee the city and go to hide in some caves. And this ends the adventure for the night. Of course, next game brings up the problem: what will the city do about the most vile and evil mass murderers in all of history. Sure you could just ignore it. But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking. They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

So, anyone?

I've been on both sides of this situation. As a DM I was astounded that my players did such a things. As a player I felt set-up by the DM (rather than by the NPCs).

I think the first bit of advice should come from the regular DM. I don't think a "talk" needs to go much beyond "I didn't expect this reaction from you (players); I'm sorry if you felt trapped into it"

Otherwise, my reflex would be to re-orient the campaign which, as a stand-in DM, might be harder for you to do. They're barred from Good-town; they can't openly go back, but the town isn't gonna send bounty hunters after them either (unless they go back and massacre more guards). Narratively speaking, this is really good material and would use it big time. You now have a shady npc that knows what the characters can do, a villain that got away with murder and found himself the perfect scapegoats, a potential redemption arch, or the PC go bold and take over the town... This is good stuff

 

[Mort]

See, if at this point the players or the GM don't want to to play it that way, then campaign's over in my view. To do otherwise is to ignore the consequences of the player's choices. TTRPGs don't have save points, generally speaking. You keep going from where you are or you call it.

Normally, sure.

But this is a different situation - with a guest DM that unintentionally derailed things (well, the players derailed but under the guest DM).

It merits an examination and discussion of where the group/campaign wants to go from this point.

And one, not TOO out there option, is essentially a save point. The actual DM looks at the players (or the OP if he keeps DMing) and says ok folks we've just had a couple sessions of your mirror universe murderhobo selves and how they would take on the situation. If that's how you want to continue, alright we'll go from there. But if you want to revert to your non-mirror universe versions and play it out differently, we can try that too. Thoughts?

Obviously the murderhobo comment etc. would only work for the right group and would have to be modified depending on players involved. But there are definitely options other than scrap everything and start over (though that too is an option, especially if the old DM doesn't actually want to come back for a while).