How would you react to the 'ole bait and switch?

[Pseudonym]

One bait and switch situation I've experienced was back in 1st edition where our characters ended up in modern England (well, we were playing in the early 1980s, so modern for then). We were looking for the Mace of St. Cuthbert, which for some reason was in a museum.

It was wacky, and a fun time, but we eventually made it back home to our world. Had we been stuck in the "real world" it would rapidly have lost its excitement value.

Wacky old school modules like Dungeonland and Land Beyond the Magic Mirror were fun too, but the prospect of returning home was always there.

As others have said, execution is key. If it were a situation of "Okay, you're a dwarven paladin on Endor now. Deal with it.", I would not find it enjoyable at all.

 

[ciaran00]

I like the matrix and all, but the ole "and you wake up" or "this was all a dream" dream sequence just makes me mad. Think of something else!

ciaran

 

[Cbas10]

Typically, depending on how radical the change is, I don't care for the bait-n-switch style of games when the DM actually changes games or changes overall setting themes.

One of you mentioned going from Deadlands to D&D; this would irritate me to no end, but I would give it at least a shot if I knew the DM was just that damned good. I actually did have the unfortunate experience of going from a D&D game into a Sci-fi setting via a setting similar to the Barrier Peaks. As soon as someone used their elven thinblade to deflect a laser blast (the character did have the appropriate abilities to deflect arrows), I was out.

A few times, I have been told that we would be playing in one setting or another, only to find out that the campaign quickly transferred to something odd (such as Greyhawk to Dark Sun or Spelljammer to Ravenloft). That really does change the overall theme of the game; especially when such a change is permanent. In these cases, I want AT LEAST as good of a storyline as the story/background I came up with for my character.

All in all, when I get involved with playing a game, I really enjoy getting into the mood and themes of the setting and scenarios. We can roleplay all day long, but it does not mean squat to me if the DM either does not make me feel like my character is IN that setting or rips the setting out from beneath my feet.

Some days I want to go see an action movie; some days I want a good mystery. Same with games. Don't waste my time by "tricking" me into a genre that is not nearly as appealing as shopping for a new DVD, and I won't waste your time by picking out how the story elements of such a crossover do not make any sense.

 

[Nightfall]

Psion,

Is part of that change from nautical to planehopping going to include some Malhavoc press stuff?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Ah yes, reminds me of a nice campaign I was going to play in, but the first thing that happened was that the characters were drafted into an army with no recourse. It was railroading plain and simple. We played out the campaign, defecting as soon as we had a chance, but the campaign flavor just tasted bad from then on and we always wished it had never happened.

If the players have some part in the twist, if they can stop it or help it move along, and if they can avoid it if they want, then it's okay. Otherwise, the players lose all control of their environment and might feel as if they're only watching the DM's game instead of playing in it. Now, if you've played several campaigns with this group and you know exactly what they like, if they've been saying how much they'd really like another Ravenloft game, and if they're characters would fit well, and if you know they wouldn't mind, then go ahead and do it.

Once, I sent a party to Carceri. They had LOTS of chances to avoid it, but they decided that barrelling in fighting was the best way to go about stopping the BBEG. When that section of the Plane actually fell into Carceri (which I had been hinting at for some time) it took the PCs with it, and they were trapped there for a good long time. Made sense, they could have avoided it, but they didn't like it after about three or four sessions of them trying to escape the Prison Plane. Bad idea on my part, I shouldn't have made it an option if it was going to lead to frustration, even if it made sense. So, it really depends on the situations involved and what is fun for the game more than anything else at all.

 

[s/LaSH]

I've completely pulled the rug out from under my players a time or two, and intend to do so again. They enjoyed it. That said, the rug was quite clearly on top of something else. They just didn't expect it to be bigger than the room.

If that metaphor's too dense, try this: I didn't invalidate anything about the characters, I didn't change the basis of what they were doing. Their goals were still the same, but suddenly they realised they were going about them in entirely the wrong way.

I'd tell you more, but it'd ruin the future of my campaign-based webcomic.

Which should tell you something about our gaming style. I've written fiction in the past. My players enjoyed it. I took it up a step and allowed them autonomy in a world that I controlled. They enjoyed it, especially when the story started kicking in. This is not the kind of gaming philosophy currently in vogue, where players and GM take responsibility for creating the story. I had the story, they had the ability to further it, and they trusted me to provide a good tale by the time it was done. Is that invalid? I don't think so if we're having fun.

They also call me 'the twisted one'. They'd probably be disappointed if I didn't try something like this on them.

 

[Blood Jester]

Having experienced both, I'd much rather a well executed, genre-shifting B&S that lets me keep growing a character's personality in reaction to radical change, than canning the campaign and starting over from scratch for the hell of it.

But I like Hostess SnoBalls too.