My players' pet theory is better than what I had planned. Is it cheesy for me to change things to match?

[Will Doyle]

I do this all the time. I say go for it.

 

[fjw70]

I do this all the time. I say go for it.

Ditto.

 

[Dungeoneer]

Simple question:

My players' pet theory is better than what I had planned. Is it cheesy for me to change things to match?

My players are currently trying to get to the bottom of a major mystery, and they have come up with a theory that matches all the evidence available, plus lines of connection I had not realized. The theory itself is not correct as I have the story planned. But their idea is so much better than mine (not to mention cooler and more epic) I just want to change what I have planned to match.

Do you think this is cheesy, or a sacrifice of artistic DM integrity? Would you, or have you, ever done similar?

Not cheesy at all! Sounds like you're blessed with some cool players. Go for it!

I have done this before on a couple of occasions. The main one that I recall is when my players were fighting a lich. They had picked up some small, strange item earlier and suddenly one of them said, "Oh my gosh! That item must be his phylactery!"

Well, it wasn't meant to be. In fact I don't think that item had any real significance. But it was such a moment of profound revelation that I decided to go with it, and when the players destroyed the item the lich was also destroyed.

 

[Mistwell]

Yeah I do this often as well. Though I usually try to change it a bit, or add something from my original plan.

Sometimes it works to my player's disadvantage. Recently I described a room to my players, and they assumed from the description it was heavily trapped. It wasn't...but their reasons for thinking it was, were so compelling, that I decided sure why not add a bunch of traps.

The thief ended up losing his eyebrows on a fire trap, but everyone had a good time.

 

[adamc]

Go with the cooler idea. Not only will it please your players and make the game more fun, but it will challenge you to adjust your supporting material to fit -- it makes the game more improvisational, and in my experience, that is almost always the best thing.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Some DMs don't even bother to come up with their own interpretation of the situation, since the players will come up with their own anyway. Go for it (with a twist, as suggested).

I remember an anecdote where an author (Piers Anthony?) had a plot point that he wasn't really fond of - involving a prophecy - when a reader submission came up with a much more satisfying ending, so the author ditched the original idea for the reader's. And credited him.

 

[Storminator]

Some DMs don't even bother to come up with their own interpretation of the situation, since the players will come up with their own anyway. Go for it (with a twist, as suggested).

I kicked off my most recent phase of my campaign like this. I had the PCs doing political maneuvering at a party. I decided whichever NPC they liked the best would be kidnapped, another NPC they interacted with would be knifed, and there would be a conspiracy.

So when one of my players made up a conspiracy rumor and circulated it at the party I recognized this obvious truth. My game is much better for it, and truthfully, I never would have come up with a such a far fetched conspiracy.

PS

 

[doghead]

...

Do you think this is cheesy, or a sacrifice of artistic DM integrity? Would you, or have you, ever done similar?

Assuming it doesn't require an excessive amount of re-preparation, then run with it. And if you can add a twist to it (as someone above suggested) all the better.

thotd

 

[Ahnehnois]

I would ask myself questions along the lines of:
Is their idea really better, or does it just sound cool now?
Does it fit? Fit with the established canon, the tone of the campaign, with any goals you might have?
Would it be feasible to implement (i.e in terms of the amount of work the DM has to do to prep for it)?

Assuming the answer to these types of questions is yes (which seems implicit), then I say go for it. The final result matters more than the process, and given the choice between some interesting new avenue of play and having the players be disappointed when the big reveal is less interesting than they thought it would be, I think the former is definitely more appealing.

Of course, you can always throw in your own twist.

 

[Umbran]

Do you think this is cheesy, or a sacrifice of artistic DM integrity? Would you, or have you, ever done similar?

Nope. "Artistic integrity" is for those who want to be recognized for their art only after they're dead.

A GM can take inspiration from anywhere - I steal from published novels and campaign settings, TV shows and movies. Why shouldn't I also use good ideas that come from my players, too? If it doesn't cause any continuity or internal-consistency conflicts, why not? Go for it!