No Good Choices

I'd like to make a case for taking your game to the darkest places you can imagine. Not just with violence or carnage but the sort of horror that makes you question everything. This might sound complicated but it's actually very simple. You give your player characters no good choices.

choices.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

I should start by saying if you are thinking of running something exceptionally dark or intense, make sure the whole group are on the same page with this. There are plenty of safety tools out there these days, so use them. Seriously. You might think you know your group pretty well, but you might not know them as well as you think. If the purpose of the game is going to the places most people will be uncomfortable with, make damn sure everyone is willing to go there and what their limits are.

So what am I talking about? Put simply I mean moral choices with no good answer. In a game like this players are constantly faced with situations where they have to make a decision between two options they'd never contemplate, and where doing nothing is just as bad. They might have to kill a friend to close a portal, otherwise demons will tear the world apart. They might have to decide who doesn't get to eat so there is enough food for everyone, and where sharing equally means everyone will die. If someone has to be sacrificed, will they lay down their life or choose someone else? Every path leads to something they will have trouble living with. There won't be an opportunity for them to kill a stranger or the bad guy to save the world, its going to have to be a friend, of someone who wants to live and has so much to live for. When faced with these choices, what is the right answer, and what bad things will they contemplate to find a different one?

Filling your game with these sort of no win situations might not sound fun, and that's understandable. But this level of horror can lead to very intense gaming sessions. You will get to see your characters at their absolute worse, and possibly their best, and in this way they live all the more. By uncovering the deepest and darkest parts of your character you will get to know them far better than if they just went down a dungeon. Putting a character through the wringer emotionally is often far more painful than doing so physically and far more revealing. It also allows players to consider some terrible choices in a safe environment. What would you do in that situation? Do you think you could choose more wisely?

Dark moral choices force a story to move in a very different direction. Usually, when faced with two bad options the protagonists insist they will find a third, better option. They are held up as heroes for not backing down, believing that if they just keep going and avoid making the choice they will be vindicated. But you can argue there is a certain cowardice to this, a refusal to accept the truth of a situation and face it. But what if they are wrong and (as they were told) there is no third option. Everything comes crashing down because they couldn't make a decision. Are their actions still laudable and heroic?

It can be a hard lesson for player characters to learn that they can do the best they can, and possibly achieve their goal, but not be hailed as heroes. You may have closed the portal to the demon realm and saved the Earth, but Richard isn't coming back, and neither is his family. It is hard to call it a win when your character may spend the rest of their lives wondering if they could have done something, anything, that would have turned out better. How long this haunts them, and how much will add layers to them, and create new dynamics in a character group. It's been a few months, but Bob still has nightmares, but why has Sarah seemed to forget about it, and where does Carl go at night and why won't he talk about it?

These choices need not always be big ones. Stories are full of people who did something they knew was bad, but didn't seem that bad, and it paid them well or got their mum the medicine she needed. The mysterious package that just needs delivering, or the door that they just have to leave unlocked seem no big deal. The money is too good to not do something so minor. But they know that no one would offer so much if it really wasn't that important. When the package turns out to spread a terrible virus, or the open door allows a killer to go on a rampage its already too late. But your mum got her meds, or you could pay off your brother's gambling debts before the mob killed him. So everything's ok, isn't it?

This sort of game isn't for everyone, or every game. It works best in horror and modern games, such as zombie apocalypse style games or cold war spy drama. You may like to keep your games heroic, and that's fine. But it can make for some very intense role playing sessions and truly memorable games. It is fun to play a heroes, but heroes aren't really that real. Real life offers hard choices, and making player characters face those choices makes them seem all the more real.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Andrew Peregrine

Andrew Peregrine

MGibster

Legend
If a DM consistently made me choose between two bad choices with no other option I'd find a different game. I hate modules that make you choose between a devil and a demon. In my experience all it leads to is everybody playing PCs that are self-centered with no morals.

I don't think anyone here is advocating that the DM consistently forces the PCs to choose between bad choices with no other options. How many modules have you played that features the PCs choosing between a devil and a demon?

It's like those movies where no matter what the protagonist does, everyone dies at the end. Might be fun twist in a movie on an extremely rare basis but it is so over used.

Overused? In my movie watching experience, it hardly ever happens in Hollywood movies unless it's based on a historical even like The Alamo or Glory. Even on television, the final episodes of television shows like Blake's 7 and Forever Knight were very surprising and few shows even today end on such grim notes. We like our happy endings.

So sue me. It's a game and I want to play a hero who somehow overcomes the odds and wins in the end - even if that means personal sacrifice. As others have said, what works in a story doesn't necessarily work in a game, life is stressful enough as it is sometimes I just want to escape reality.

No reason to sue ya. If you like Magic Shell on your ice cream it's okay if I prefer hot fudge.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MGibster

Legend
This sort of game isn't for everyone, or every game. It works best in horror and modern games, such as zombie apocalypse style games or cold war spy drama. You may like to keep your games heroic, and that's fine. But it can make for some very intense role playing sessions and truly memorable games. It is fun to play a heroes, but heroes aren't really that real. Real life offers hard choices, and making player characters face those choices makes them seem all the more real.

Folks, even the author, Andrew Peregrine, realizes this isn't for everyone or every game. But he also mentions that the choices don't always have to be so big. Has anyone read The Shining by Stephen King? There's a scene where Jack Torrence is getting settled into his gig at the Overlook hotel and he contemplates leaving. Something about this hotel bothers him, he knows it bothers his son, and he's got a limited window to get out before the snow season starts. But if he leaves he won't be able to support his family and will end up on welfare and he will have burned a bridge with his friend who pulled strings to get him the caretaker position. There was no good solution to Jack's problem at the time.
 

Oofta

Legend
I don't think anyone here is advocating that the DM consistently forces the PCs to choose between bad choices with no other options. How many modules have you played that features the PCs choosing between a devil and a demon?



Overused? In my movie watching experience, it hardly ever happens in Hollywood movies unless it's based on a historical even like The Alamo or Glory. Even on television, the final episodes of television shows like Blake's 7 and Forever Knight were very surprising and few shows even today end on such grim notes. We like our happy endings.



No reason to sue ya. If you like Magic Shell on your ice cream it's okay if I prefer hot fudge.

Most of the games that pushed the "hard choice" were back when I was playing Living Greyhawk. Games where you literally had to choose between a devil and a demon*. Games where the mod was over in 15 minutes if you refused to help out a morally questionable NPC and do something that was at best borderline evil, etc. We went home after 15 minutes. Went to a con in The Bandit Kingdoms (different regions had different themes) and everyone that lived there had a neutral PC because this came up on such a regular basis.

As for the movies, I probably should have been more clear. A lot of horror movies nowadays are no-win everyone dies, or worse. Kind of fun now and then but after watching the 10th horror movie in a row with that trope I gave up on a genre I used to enjoy now and then. A few like Night of the Living Dead and Cabin in the Woods were still fun because of the setup but they were the exception.

But different strokes for different folks. Even when I DM I still have situations where the PCs can't win in a straight up fight, where they have to go to plan B or simply do a valiant retreat to fight another day.

*We said "screw you both" and the DM took pity on us. If he had run the module as written it was supposed to be an automatic failure and IIRC a TPK.
 

BryonD

Hero
This is high end stuff. If done well it can create the kind of things players talk about for years. But it does need to be done well and with a group of players who are invested in this type game.
 


mockman1890

Explorer
Thanks for the article. Since a few people were saying they can't handle dark subject matter in the current depressing world climate, I just wanted to say I'm still 100% down with it. I'm still watching apocalyptic & horror movies just like always. Different people cope with life problems in different ways.

As for the actual content of the article (haha XD), it's thought-provoking! Definitely there are some groups/players who hate this kind of stuff and feel cheated being stuck in a no-win situation. OTOH, other people really enjoy it. I think it's a case of "getting player buy-in" and letting people know in advance it's going to be a dark game, to quote a Robin Laws phrase. Personally, I think it can be a lot of fun. Saying something "isn't for everyone" isn't a diss, since almost nothing is "for everyone".
 

toucanbuzz

No rule is inviolate
Dark Sun's starting adventure, A Little Knowledge, begins with those types of no-good choices, and the setting is ripe for them:

  • Players begin in the ruins of a slave caravan in the middle of the desert. The long-legged elven tribe who attacked it saved their own people and loped off into the desert wastes, generously allowing the rest of the escaped slaves an open-mouthed jar of water (half a waterskin's worth) and a weapon. They could care less if you live or die. It's not their problem. Some slaves begin killing off weaker ones for their water. Others run futilely into the desert after the tribe and will die in the effort. Do players get involved, risking precious water, which might slosh out of the jars or be stolen by someone darting in and running away?
  • No matter what players do, there's not enough water to last a day, even if players somehow took everyone else's water. There's no food. There's no shelter. Already, the cruel scorching red sun is beating down, superheating the sand beneath one's flimsy sandals. At the end of the day, who in the party got to have a sip of that water and who went thirsty?
  • It's that dilemma that sets up an attack by escaped slaves a day later. They ran out of water. There's no good and evil involved. They're simply desperate and hope by a mass rush one of them will get lucky. There's no good solution. Even if you could reason with them, there's not enough water for everyone to live. They know this. And the party hopefully realizes this desperate group could, by the narrowest of margins, be them.
  • In a future encounter, the party is invited to raid an innocent caravan of travelers for their water by a tribe of former escaped slaves whose water supply has dried up. They don't normally do things like this, but times are desperate. Even if you avoid casualties, are you taking so much water that you're condemning those travelers to death? If you do nothing, people in the tribe will likely die.
Not every day or every situation has to be "no-good" choice, but it immediately sets the tone that this isn't going to be a game where the good guys always win, because it's hard to say who is good and bad when one is dying of thirst. Immortal sorcerer kings keep their boots on the necks of the people, but they're protecting those people from something far worse. And so on.

From time to time, it can be a good change of pace, but as the OP aptly notes, the group has to be all-in for this style of play.
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
If my D&D games are like a pizza, the 'no good choices' plot would be like jalapenos, anchovies, or black olives. Delicious in the right amounts, but not all of my players will care for it, and it's easy to overdo it and ruin it for everyone.
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Dark Sun's starting adventure, A Little Knowledge, begins with those types of no-good choices, and the setting is ripe for them:

  • Players begin in the ruins of a slave caravan in the middle of the desert. The long-legged elven tribe who attacked it saved their own people and loped off into the desert wastes, generously allowing the rest of the escaped slaves an open-mouthed jar of water (half a waterskin's worth) and a weapon. They could care less if you live or die. It's not their problem. Some slaves begin killing off weaker ones for their water. Others run futilely into the desert after the tribe and will die in the effort. Do players get involved, risking precious water, which might slosh out of the jars or be stolen by someone darting in and running away?
  • No matter what players do, there's not enough water to last a day, even if players somehow took everyone else's water. There's no food. There's no shelter. Already, the cruel scorching red sun is beating down, superheating the sand beneath one's flimsy sandals. At the end of the day, who in the party got to have a sip of that water and who went thirsty?
  • It's that dilemma that sets up an attack by escaped slaves a day later. They ran out of water. There's no good and evil involved. They're simply desperate and hope by a mass rush one of them will get lucky. There's no good solution. Even if you could reason with them, there's not enough water for everyone to live. They know this. And the party hopefully realizes this desperate group could, by the narrowest of margins, be them.
  • In a future encounter, the party is invited to raid an innocent caravan of travelers for their water by a tribe of former escaped slaves whose water supply has dried up. They don't normally do things like this, but times are desperate. Even if you avoid casualties, are you taking so much water that you're condemning those travelers to death? If you do nothing, people in the tribe will likely die.
Not every day or every situation has to be "no-good" choice, but it immediately sets the tone that this isn't going to be a game where the good guys always win, because it's hard to say who is good and bad when one is dying of thirst. Immortal sorcerer kings keep their boots on the necks of the people, but they're protecting those people from something far worse. And so on.

From time to time, it can be a good change of pace, but as the OP aptly notes, the group has to be all-in for this style of play.
So, the starting situation is somewhat decent, in that it puts an immediate concern on the PCs that they have to deal with. This is the kind of thing that is great for creating the space for the play to generate a hard choice. It's reduce, though, in that there is already no solution -- no matter what the players choose, they will end in the same space: not enough water and set upon by other desperates for their bodies' water. This ends up mooting whatever hard choice the players make in the opening scene and replacing it with a meaningless choice that is a bit of illusionism.

The last choice is another of these examples. Nothing the players choose puts them here, it's a forced choice on the the players by the GM to see what they'll do -- commit horrible acts or do nothing, allowing horrible outcomes. This even presupposes that the group has a reason to care for the caravan which isn't established in the example, leaving this more of the 'what's your alignment' style questions that are a bad basis for hard choices.

Hard choices are great, but not ones that are pushed onto players by the GM (or module). Ones that originate in play, due to consequences of play, are much more rewarding and avoid many of the problems mentioned in this thread by those leery of hard choices. Too often in our hobby this kind of play is just the GM pushing what the GM thinks will be fun for the GM onto the players.
 


Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top