D&D 5E Forked from the Quasit Thread - Some DMing Advice Learned from my Mistakes.

[Croesus]

I don't understand why PCs would trash-talk vastly more powerful NPCs unless they think the GM won't punish them.

Well, by design, the game does put the spotlight on the PCs. So sometimes players forget to treat NPCs as anything more than props. That's when the GM needs to remind them, which I did. It definitely took the players completely by surprise, and they haven't repeated that particular mistake since.

Another reason could be that sometimes players just aren't invested in a serious session. For whatever reasons, they just want to consume munchies and make Monty Python jokes. A GM just has to roll with it at times.

 

[cooperjer]

I've been watching Chris Perkins on Dice, Camera, Action for about two episodes. He seems to have a vast knowledge of the Forgotten Realms and a skill for taking a player idea that wouldn't normally work and working with it to incorporate it with the history of the world he has the game in. So, in the situation where some of the PCs are taking the direct approach the result may be any of the following:

1. Another rival tribe attacks in the middle of the conversation which drives the PCs out of the social game and gives them an opportunity to: gain renown with the tribe leader, kill the tribe leader with a little better odds, or search the camp amongst the chaos.
2. The tribal leader would ask the PCs to perform a task for him. Let's say the tribal leader needs: a magic item recovered, the head of a rival tribe, the militia of a near by town weakened, or some similar task. This opens up opportunity for the PCs to earn renown with the tribal leader. It also opens up a way for the tribal leader to observed the strengths of the PCs and use that knowledge against them.
3. A significantly powerful creature enters the scene (hulking combat master, ancient shaman, pet dragon, etc). The players or PCs may not be knowledgeable with the power, but the DM would give an intimidating description which more or less tells the PCs in the scene that combat is not an option and the tribal leader is not changing their mind.

There are probably several more ways to work the scene to end up with the player feeling satisfied that some knowledge was gained in the scene or more opportunities developed from the scene.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I’ve certainly been in that situation before. I’m reminded of the quote by Terry Pratchett:

“First Thoughts are the everyday thoughts. Everyone has those. Second Thoughts are the thoughts you think about the way you think. People who enjoy thinking have those. Third Thoughts are thoughts that watch the world and think all by themselves. They’re rare, and often troublesome. Listening to them is part of witchcraft.”

While DMing, the first impulse would probably be the realistic thing – it would make sense that the chieftain would call in his guards and knock them out. And it can be so tempting when a PC is being particularly impertinent. But the trick is to be able to shut that thought down before you open your mouth, and instead think of what would be the most fun and exciting. It’s not easy, and is something I am always working towards.

But, and here's the thing. I could have salvaged things and turned it around. I didn't have to call in the guards. While calling them in was perfectly plausible, it's not like it was mandated for any reason.

 

[S'mon]

I’ve certainly been in that situation before. I’m reminded of the quote by Terry Pratchett:

“First Thoughts are the everyday thoughts. Everyone has those. Second Thoughts are the thoughts you think about the way you think. People who enjoy thinking have those. Third Thoughts are thoughts that watch the world and think all by themselves. They’re rare, and often troublesome. Listening to them is part of witchcraft.”

While DMing, the first impulse would probably be the realistic thing – it would make sense that the chieftain would call in his guards and knock them out. And it can be so tempting when a PC is being particularly impertinent. But the trick is to be able to shut that thought down before you open your mouth, and instead think of what would be the most fun and exciting. It’s not easy, and is something I am always working towards.

For me what would be most fun & exciting there would be a cool battle scene in the throneroom, even if it is a likely TPK.

 

[Soul Stigma]

Dungeon World taught me a different way of approaching things, as a DM, which spilled over into D&D. If you haven't played or read it, it's a worthy game book for the shelf. Even though I'm running D&D currently, I find myself picking up DW just for reading and keeping in that mindset.

The idea behind any of the *World games is to keep the narrative moving forward. Succeed forward and fail forward. A lot of the time this means going off script. Sometimes the whole adventure ends up being completely different from how I envisioned it. The thing is, that's great - some of my favorite sessions as a DM is when I honestly didn't know what would happen next!

I won't throw out ways you "could have" handled your session and that specific scenario, as it's water under the bridge now - plus one of your players has chipped in by saying most of them chalked it up to missed opportunity.

I guess what I will say, though, is always be open to a change in plans. That said, if one player's style is what complicated things, and their style is predictably "the only way out is through", then you can even plan contingencies in the future. Still, improvisation is your friend.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

 

[Shasarak]

I'd have had him treat them like Leonidas treated the Persian ambassadors...

I don't understand why PCs would trash-talk vastly more powerful NPCs unless they think the GM won't punish them. My son could skillfully diplomatise NPCs at age 8*, how come adult players are so poor?

*Eg he had the DeGaulle/Obama trick of listening carefully, then repeating their own words back to them, down pat.

So your son repeated their own words back to them?

 

[Hussar]

So, here you telegraph to the players very plainly that they cannot enter unless they have business with the CHIEFTAIN. The players state they have no business with the chieftain and insist upon entering, attempting to intimidate the guards. To me, this means the chosen approach to their goal automatically fails - the guards do not let them pass, no roll. I mean, you JUST told them they can't enter unless they have business with the chieftain.

But somehow they manage to intimidate their way past anyway? How did that happen? Are you allowing players to choose to make ability checks? It seems to me if there was an issue with this scene, it started right there.

Chalk that up to different playstyles. Player says he's going to intimidate the guards into letting him through, I'm not going to stop him, nor do I believe in auto-fails. You want to do that, give it a go, see how the dice fall out and I'll abide by that. He rolled very high on the intimidate, so, they backed down and let him in. Totally fair, AFAIC.

Your overall point about not blocking player ideas is a good one, however. As a player, I would not have seen you having the guards prevent our entry as blocking. You told the players what they needed to do up front (in so many words) and they didn't do it. The smart play would have been to lie to the guards about wanting to talk to the chieftain, then try to get access to the cult leader once past the guards.

Oh yeah. Like I said, this was handled pretty much as badly as it could be without outright violence. The whole scene went wahoonie shaped pretty much from the get go. But, I will disagree with you about the idea that just because the NPC told them how to get past, they had to do that one and only thing. Heck, bribing the guards would have worked (and worked out quite well in the next scene). There's a million things they could have done.

I am one of the players who was involved in this.

Now, since I wasn't near the group who did this (we broke the cardinal rule about never splitting the party...one group was going to talk to the Chieftain while the rest of us were looking for other clues), I didn't have a say in what was going on. Needless to say, this was the playing style of the player involved. He was a little upset that it went so poorly, but the rest of us blew it off.

I think that most of the party shrugged it off and realized it was a missed opportunity.

Heh. Yeah, nuance is hard to get across on forums. It wasn't like we had a major blow out or anything like that. Just something that stuck in my head and I thought I'd share how I'd do it differently if I had the opportunity.

 

[S'mon]

So your son repeated their own words back to them?

Yeah, skillful diplomats & politicians do this a lot. People think (a) It shows you understand them and (b) If you understand them you must sympathise with and agree with them so (c) You must be a pretty swell guy.

Ylaruese Preceptor: "So you see, the Dream of the Desert Garden is..."

Count William (Bill's PC), newly appointed ruler of Ylaruam: "The Dream of the Desert Garden is..."

Ylaruese Preceptor: ~Truly this man is Wise in the Dream of the Desert Garden! We should shield him from harm!~

 

[iserith]

Chalk that up to different playstyles. Player says he's going to intimidate the guards into letting him through, I'm not going to stop him, nor do I believe in auto-fails. You want to do that, give it a go, see how the dice fall out and I'll abide by that. He rolled very high on the intimidate, so, they backed down and let him in. Totally fair, AFAIC.

What do you do if a player tries to undertake an impossible task like hitting the moon with an arrow (given context that makes it impossible)?

Oh yeah. Like I said, this was handled pretty much as badly as it could be without outright violence. The whole scene went wahoonie shaped pretty much from the get go. But, I will disagree with you about the idea that just because the NPC told them how to get past, they had to do that one and only thing. Heck, bribing the guards would have worked (and worked out quite well in the next scene). There's a million things they could have done.

Sure, there a many things the player could have chosen. He or she just chose the thing you said wasn't going to work (try to see anyone BUT the chieftain). But it worked anyway? If I had to pinpoint the place where this situation went awry, it was right there. To the extent it went wrong, anyway. If you're anything like me, you're probably being harder on yourself than you need to be.

Whenever I find something did go as well as I think it could have, it almost always comes down to me not doing something fundamental. "Playstyle" differences aside, judging whether something is possible or impossible before calling for a check is the fundamental thing I see here, given the benefit of your hindsight. See DMG, page 237. In improvisational acting terms, you didn't block the player (initially) - you blocked yourself, by contradicting what you telegraphed about what was possible and impossible.

 

[Soul Stigma]

Relax- it's only a game.

You've taken that too far. Life's the game - D&D is serious business!


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app