Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 7555484" data-attributes="member: 85870"><p>So I've been having a bit of an internal struggle recently over some of the challenges I recently introduced to my players.</p><p></p><p>One of the players has been clearly signaling throughout the campaign that he'd like to set up his character as a sort of power-behind-the-scenes in the criminal underworld, and as such I've been throwing a bunch of challenges and fictional inputs that fall in line with this intent. </p><p></p><p>And in some ways this has been a great thing, as this player is normally the one completely obsessed with powergaming/character min-maxing, to the exclusion of creating a workable character persona. He's the type of player when we'd play GURPS with a different GM, he'd take 70 or 80 points of disadvantages (which if you're not familiar with GURPS, basically means you take negative character personality traits in exchange for a 1:1 ratio of character generation stat and skill points). So his GURPS character would end up being a hulking monster two-hand wielding a tetsubo, but would have the "Smells Bad," "Beserker," "Callous," "Blood Thirsty," "Hates Children" disadvantages (these may not in fact be actual GURPS disadvantages, so please GURPS-ophiles, spare me the angst <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />). </p><p></p><p>So don't get me wrong---the fact that he's actively pursuing a character-driven agenda within the fiction is a massive positive.</p><p></p><p>The issue I'm having is that I feel like, as a GM, I'm letting him off a bit easy when it comes to consequences. It's not that I don't want him to succeed, it's that I don't want him to have an "easy-peasy" skate-on-by without really dealing with some of the "stuff" that goes along with it. But I'm conflicted, because I don't want to turn the game into a game of escalating consequences, for which the player(s) have no recourse other than to cow-tow to what I'm presenting. I want them to have avenues for success, while still balancing the need to present challenges.</p><p></p><p>So how do I do this better? How do I introduce consequences/complications that are A) interesting, B) have real dramatic heft within the fiction, and C) don't require the party to start finagling with me as the GM?</p><p></p><p>For example, his character recently set off a chain of gang-related "reorganization" in a run-down city. And I want to allow him his victory, but still bring back in meaningful consequences that are going to challenge the group. </p><p></p><p>I'm wondering if some of the problem is not being transparent enough with the group about the fallout/reactions of what will happen based on certain choices they make. (Of course, a lot of times the players don't care about the consequences regardless, but that's another story.)</p><p></p><p>I'm wondering if it would be enough to start saying things like, "Okay, here's what your characters know about the situation, and here's three or four things that are relevant to what's going on, and here's 3 or 4 opportunities that are in front of you to affect what happens next."</p><p></p><p>Is this enough? Is this too inflexible? Do I need to be more open to player input? Genuinely I have no interest in pre-determining an outcome; I want the player's choices to matter to their fullest, but I do want there to be <em>consequences</em>. </p><p></p><p>I feel like I'm talking in circles now, so I'll hold my peace and wait for you, my esteemed colleagues, to respond.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 7555484, member: 85870"] So I've been having a bit of an internal struggle recently over some of the challenges I recently introduced to my players. One of the players has been clearly signaling throughout the campaign that he'd like to set up his character as a sort of power-behind-the-scenes in the criminal underworld, and as such I've been throwing a bunch of challenges and fictional inputs that fall in line with this intent. And in some ways this has been a great thing, as this player is normally the one completely obsessed with powergaming/character min-maxing, to the exclusion of creating a workable character persona. He's the type of player when we'd play GURPS with a different GM, he'd take 70 or 80 points of disadvantages (which if you're not familiar with GURPS, basically means you take negative character personality traits in exchange for a 1:1 ratio of character generation stat and skill points). So his GURPS character would end up being a hulking monster two-hand wielding a tetsubo, but would have the "Smells Bad," "Beserker," "Callous," "Blood Thirsty," "Hates Children" disadvantages (these may not in fact be actual GURPS disadvantages, so please GURPS-ophiles, spare me the angst :)). So don't get me wrong---the fact that he's actively pursuing a character-driven agenda within the fiction is a massive positive. The issue I'm having is that I feel like, as a GM, I'm letting him off a bit easy when it comes to consequences. It's not that I don't want him to succeed, it's that I don't want him to have an "easy-peasy" skate-on-by without really dealing with some of the "stuff" that goes along with it. But I'm conflicted, because I don't want to turn the game into a game of escalating consequences, for which the player(s) have no recourse other than to cow-tow to what I'm presenting. I want them to have avenues for success, while still balancing the need to present challenges. So how do I do this better? How do I introduce consequences/complications that are A) interesting, B) have real dramatic heft within the fiction, and C) don't require the party to start finagling with me as the GM? For example, his character recently set off a chain of gang-related "reorganization" in a run-down city. And I want to allow him his victory, but still bring back in meaningful consequences that are going to challenge the group. I'm wondering if some of the problem is not being transparent enough with the group about the fallout/reactions of what will happen based on certain choices they make. (Of course, a lot of times the players don't care about the consequences regardless, but that's another story.) I'm wondering if it would be enough to start saying things like, "Okay, here's what your characters know about the situation, and here's three or four things that are relevant to what's going on, and here's 3 or 4 opportunities that are in front of you to affect what happens next." Is this enough? Is this too inflexible? Do I need to be more open to player input? Genuinely I have no interest in pre-determining an outcome; I want the player's choices to matter to their fullest, but I do want there to be [I]consequences[/I]. I feel like I'm talking in circles now, so I'll hold my peace and wait for you, my esteemed colleagues, to respond. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
Top