Is this "Fair" - Part III

[Odhanan]

I think what I am becoming to realize after reading a bunch of these threads is that there are many people that do not believe that there should be challenges in the gaming world that are not level appropriate.

Absolutely true. This is part of the stuff players like and dislike around the game table. A DM should make sure to know that kind of things before hand, if at all possible, so that the type of entertainment remains appropriate for the type of players.

 

[wayne62682]

So how did the PC's get "goaded"?

Don't know about your group, but in mine "great treasure" is like dropping a piece of meat into a tank of pirahna; they'll be all over it in a second.

They were given a plot hook that was not appropriate for their level, but the GM did not push them to go there.

Nor did he drop any hints that it was way out of their league.. which begs the question of why offer the hook in the first place unless it was to TPK the party?

As a player I would not venture anywhere near a location that I had not gathered information about, and if I could not get any information I would have waited to go there.

Well.. this I agree on.

In fact not being able to gather any information should be a clue that perhaps they should investigate further before going there.

I could have sworn that the revised information said that no amount of investigation could turn up anything:

Since the location is not well known none of the characters are able to find anything about it using their skills

I think what I am becoming to realize after reading a bunch of these threads is that there are many people that do not believe that there should be challenges in the gaming world that are not level appropriate.

No offense, but I see the opposite... that people get a thrill out of putting their players up against things that are not level appropriate in order to see their reactions and to laugh/deride them for assuming that it was level appropriate. IMO it's bad DMing to put the players in a situation like that in the first place. There is nothing wrong with letting them witness these things (e.g. as the level 1 party heads to the dungeon, a great wyrm dragon flies overhead towards its lair in the mountains) to illustrate that the world isn't a static place waiting for them to make the next move, but to throw them against it and then to dare to call "metagaming" for thinking that maybe the players want a real campaign and not an "I'm the DM, now face my army of Tarrasques and cower before my majesty!" ego-trip is utter rubbish. I don't know if that mentality is a holdover from 1st edition or what, but that kind of behaviour belongs in the pages of Knights of the Dinner Table, not in any serious real-life game. I would not stay at the table of anyone who routinely threw players into TPK situations without any indication beforehand that maybe we're over our heads. In fact, I would not play at the table of anyone who routinely threw out high level plot hooks to a low level party, period.

Again let me apologize if the comment offends anyone, that is not my intent.

In my campaign world there are things that low level PC's hear about that would be instant death if they followed up on them, IMHO there will be times that a PC will not have the appropriate skill levels to investigate something, or open a lock, or find a trap, ...etc.

But do you give them hints that it would be "instant death if they followed up on them"? If you drop the hint and they don't pick up on it, then it's their own fault and not yours. But if you let them think that they can handle it and then TPK them, it's your fault for throwing it to them in the first place.

If they decide to follow up on the map, or pull the lever, I do not feel responsible as a GM because I did not make the decision and take the action in character.

You are responsible if (and only if) you deliberately did not give any indication that the map led to the "Temple of Horrendous Doom" and that if the PCs went there they would be way out of their league, or that the lever was anything more than a normal lever. If the players are too stubborn/arrogant/etc. to pick up on anything, then it's their fault. But if you willingly lead them to the slaughter without giving them the chance to find out, then the blame lies squarely on your shoulders.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

On an overland journey to a haunted house I had my group find a Hill Giant lair. The group was 1st-2nd level PC's. They immediately began to plan how with a dancing lights spell would lure them all away and give them vast numbers of sneak attacks...to say the least it was a pretty foolish plan. These guys really thought that the party would be able to kill 8-9 Hill Giants due to their dancing lights spell, finally the most experience D&D player said, "Guys this is insane, this will be a TPK in 3 rounds tops, but probably 2 and maybe 1". Thankfully they agreed wtih him.

I give hints and clues for higher level stuff they will have to wait to deal with all the time, of course I do give them hints that it is much tougher than they can deal with.

 

[EricNoah]

Totally fair. Research up front is always a great idea that pays off in my campaigns. On the other hand, I'd also call it a waste of time and energy unless I was specifically trying to run a "wander anywhere, do anything, and take the consequences" campaign (which I'd like to do sometime but don't currently).

 

[Corvidae]

I think the problem that makes this unfair is it seems the DM was trying to lure them into the site. By not having any hint of danger on the map, not having anyone hear anything about it, and not allowing their knowledge (which for common knowledge, like the worlds deadliest dungeon, or that really dangerous place nearby is DC 5) to come into play the DM was basically begging for a TPK.

You are allowed to show encounters that are too high, that is fair, you are even allowed to bring encounters to the PC's that they should run away from. Heck, as DM, you are allowed to do basically whatever you want, but don't think everything you do will be seen as fair.

I think the luring the party to some place that was plainly too much for them is a sign of RBDMism. Just my two small copper coins.

John

 

[spectre72]

In fact, I would not play at the table of anyone who routinely threw out high level plot hooks to a low level party, period.

Again let me apologize if the comment offends anyone, that is not my intent.

Well I guess you and I will never play together then because our play styles are very different.

But I won't feel bad about that because there are plenty of players who sit at the table every month, and seem to do fine with our style of play (most of the time ).

And I know that I am not alone because all of our GM's use a similar style.

Sometimes it can seem wierd to a new player but they always seem to adapt.

Thanks for the input, it is quite interesting to see what people feel is fair.

 

[Mort]

The Scenario as initially presented is perfectly fair. The party has full choice on investigating and then ignoring the map.
With the "additions" the scenario is much less fair (or simply unfair), and frankly I can't see a DM doing this and the players having any fun at all.

Edit: I'll amend my answer on one note. If the party has plenty of other things to do and can investigate those other things to their satisfaction, then the above is ok, they don't have much business going blind into possibly dangerous territory. If, on the other hand, the DM presents them with this lead and nothing else, then it's unfair.

I have this situation in a game currently, and it's really bugging me. For the first several sessions the DM presented nothing to the party (on a scales of 0=freeform and 10=railroad, this was around .5)
then we get subtle hints of bad things happening in place X. We can't find out anything specific even after a lot of investigation (gather info, divination spells, the works). Well, this is our only lead to adventure, the alternative is staying in town doing not a whole lot (I jokingly started crafing weapons on commission, which became not so much a joke when I realised that my character made more money this way than he had in the previous 4 sessions). We get to the location, and in short order find out we are way over our heads and are in full retreat. We (the players) all express some annoyance to the DM that the only lead he's thrown to us seems to be a deathtrap. We get to see tonight if maybe there's something more to it, but it's annoying none the less.

 

[spectre72]

Since the location is not well known none of the characters are able to find anything about it using their skills (which are horrible at such a low level).

If the response to their investigations had of been "With your limited resources and lack of contacts you were not able to uncover any information about the site marked on the map in the wilderness".

Would you still think that it was unfair on the GM's part?

Would you as a player have thought it safe to go there with your limited information?

 

[Gold Roger]

The changes are still fair if there's some way for the PC's to figure out they are in over their head and after entering and leave before everybody dies. If they enter and the next thing is basically "Rocks fall, everyone dies", that's a real bummer.

 

[BlackMoria]

If the response to their investigations had of been "With your limited resources and lack of contacts you were not able to uncover any information about the site marked on the map in the wilderness".

Would you still think that it was unfair on the GM's part?

Would you as a player have thought it safe to go there with your limited information?

Given the conditions indicated in the quote, I still do not think it unfair of the DM.

As a player, there is no way in hell I would even consider going into a place without getting information on it. So, if the DM says, with your limited resources and lack of contacts, you were not able to uncover any information - that is a clue to me to leave this puppy alone until another time.

Information is power. Without information of some sort, as a player, I ain't biting on any dangled hook, regardless how enticing it looks.