GM-player Communication vs. Metagaming

[Jon_Dahl]

Scenario #1:
Players are about to do something awfully stupid. GM subtly informs them that their plans are taken straight from the litter-box. Players change their plans and from now they expect their GM to save them again if they are about to something dumb. GM is happy that the PCs are alive and well.

Scenario #2:
Players are about to do something awfully stupid. GM takes a moment to ponder is there any in-game solution (not too far-fetched) that could save them. However, players are in a dungeon and there aren't any NPCs to scream from horror after hearing their plan. So the players carry out their plan and a TPK occurs. Players will remember their folly and make a mental note not to repeat it. New characters everyone...

Which one is closer to your gaming style? Or your ideal game?

 

[Blackbrrd]

The problem I usually have isn't that the players come up with a terrible plan, but that they come up with no plan and just sit there.

 

[S'mon]

I'll:

1. Consider - is there a miscommunication - is there something the PCs should know, that the players clearly don't?

a) If yes, I tell them.
b) If not sure, ask for Knowledge checks.
c) If no, ok then.

2. Depending on #1, players may have chance to change plans.

3. If no change of plans, proceed to likely TPK.

I guess that maps closest to your Scenario #2. But I don't normally consider "Hm, what NPC can ride in and save them?" sort of thing. I won't normally have NPCs capture PCs either, though they may well accept surrender if offered. I aim to be fair to the PCs; I don't try to keep them alive.

Edit: As a D&D player, I don't want deus ex machina, so definitely #2. #1 would be acceptable where threat of PC death was not the focus of the game, eg in a heavy-Nar game it would be ok that PCs not die without player consent. Normally that is best done by imposing non-lethal consequences, though.

 

[Ringlerun]

As a DM i describe the scene to the players as best i can. What they choose to do with that information is up to them. If that leads to character deaths then that was the choice they made.

I guess with a new player who is inexperienced in roleplaying i would prod them to the right course of action. But I would hope that the more experienced players in the group would inform the player of the folly of their course of actions.

 

[amerigoV]

As a DM i describe the scene to the players as best i can. What they choose to do with that information is up to them. If that leads to character deaths then that was the choice they made.

I do feel the DM has a responsibility to ensure the information is understood by the players since the DM is the only source of information. Example: the classic battle with the Gazebo story.

Now, if I think the players understand the information provided and they still decide to make a bad choice, then I let the dice fall where they may.

 

[Li Shenron]

Scenario #1:
Players are about to do something awfully stupid. GM subtly informs them that their plans are taken straight from the litter-box. Players change their plans and from now they expect their GM to save them again if they are about to something dumb. GM is happy that the PCs are alive and well.

Scenario #2:
Players are about to do something awfully stupid. GM takes a moment to ponder is there any in-game solution (not too far-fetched) that could save them. However, players are in a dungeon and there aren't any NPCs to scream from horror after hearing their plan. So the players carry out their plan and a TPK occurs. Players will remember their folly and make a mental note not to repeat it. New characters everyone...

Which one is closer to your gaming style? Or your ideal game?

Scenario #3: Neither fully up to the DM (as in Scenario #1) nor fully up to the players (as in Scenario #2), but instead the PCs have a say on the matter. I.e. the DM checks the PC's Intelligence and Wisdom scores, makes some roll and then reveals their folly more or less clearly (from a thinly veiled clue to flat out truth) depending on the dice results.

 

[Cor Azer]

Somewhere in the middle, but closer to #2 - check character sheets for an in-game method of revealing more details of situation.

 

[Poe]

PLayer versus Character stupidity

Ultimately decisions are made by players, but with character RP in mind. As long as this then they get to reap what they sow as far as I'm concerned. I find very careful indirect intervention is best (the NPCs mentioned are handy) or you could just repeat their plan back to them in a sardonic tone, emphasising the real dumb things until they get the idea.

If something the characters know is being overlooked, then it doesn't break anything to remind them of it. The aforementioned knowledge checks are always good and don't kid-glove them, especially if you make sure that next time you're less helpful and after that just let them deal with it.

 

[Jhaelen]

My favorite way to deal with this is to ask: "Are you sure you want to do this?"

I also like asking that if the players come up with a particularly clever idea, though

 

[chriton227]

I'm similar, if the players get ready to do something that is going to end very badly, I tend to ask "Is that your final answer?" I don't point out what I think are the weak points in their plan unless it is obvious to me that the players missed something that the characters would have known. Just asking the question is usually enough for the players to do a quick reassessment of their plan, if they still want to go ahead with it, that's their choice. Sometimes they pull it off, sometimes they don't.