"Plan A is a dog....What's your Plan B?"

[BlackMoria]

I have notice over the years than the source of many a TPK has it origins in the plan or lack of a plan.

I have noticed with a number of players that I have played with over the years that they plan a initial course of action but never have a backup plan.

As a DM, I have watched my players plan or overplan and have realized the plan is woefully inadequate or ill conceived. Frequently, they make bad assumptions or have no tactical acumen, so the plan is a dog from the word go. They never have a contigency plan or a Plan B.

Whenever I was a player, I always tried to insist on a Plan B or a contigency plan. Even if I was ignored, I always had a personal Plan B for my character. Which is one factor as to why I have not lost a character I played in over 20 years of playing (notorious good luck was also a factor )

As a DM, there have been times I wanted to say "Plan A is a dog...." to my players but I haven't

So,

For players: Does your merry band make contigent plans when planning the big fight? Do you make very general plans or plan 'right to the nines' (plan every single detail), as the saying goes?

For DMs: The players are making a plan that is wholly inadequate or unsound. In your estimate, the party is going to get their heads handed to them. Do you say anything? Or do you let them go through with it and let it play out to its ugly conclusion?

 

[Crothian]

We always go with plan A, because my Plan B is always waiting in the wings. Plan B is bag of holding into a portable hole. It's been a running gag for well over a decade with me, I always try to aquire these items so I can have Plan B ready just in case.

For a while though Plan B was snapping a very powerful artifact staff. We were told never to break the staff, so naturally it become plan B.

 

[barsoomcore]

If my players are making assumptions that I feel their characters would have the in-game knowledge to avoid, I'll bring it up. However, they have proven spectacular at making assumptions without any knowledge whatsoever, so their plans usually end up in the tank.

I don't always give them lots of time to plan, though.

 

[derelictjay]

Well as a DM, one of the reasons I like to sit in when my player's are in planning is so I can chime in when the players have misinterpreted something I said. Now I never try try to change what their planning even if its stupid, I just try to make sure they understand whats happening (I'll do this even if their plans are sound), and allow them to change on their own.

 

[Thanee]

"Plan B" is always the same, it's a term for improvising on the fly, you can only have Plan A or Plan C.

We generally make plans, if possible, but often the lack of information makes planning futile (what's the point of planning if you cannot figure in what you'll stumble into, how the location looks like, and so on - if you know nothing there is nothing you can base a plan upon), so we just go with Plan B then.

Luckily, we are quite witty and quickly to adopt to a given situation and good at improvising.

Bye
Thanee

 

[mearls]

For my current players, we have:

Plan A: Get 'em! A crazed rush into danger.

Plan B: Die horribly.

Sometimes, I step in and point out egregiously bad ideas, but I don't like to do so. It feels too much like I'm railroading the party. I had a TPK last night due to really atrocious planning, stemming from the groups natural tendency to bicker. I instituted a new set of table rules that will, hopefully, solve that problem.

 

[MetalBard]

The group I play in right now evaluates threats rather carefully (some may say obsessively for the typical D&D experience). We investigate, formulate plan A, test plan A's merit's against the evidence, see if we need a contingency (usually the quaffable kind, provided by my abjurer) and then decide on whether or not to go with that course of action. Given that sort of deliberation, we've only lost one character over 23 sessions and that particular character neglected to follow Plan B when the group enacted it. Plan B in that case was run like hell back into the night and hide in the forest. The minotaur fighter decided he could take out a few more Nerakan squires on his way out. A gray robed knight of Neraka told him differently with a bolt of lightning infused with evil energy.

Some people feel our game goes slowly compared to others, but we've never even come close to a TPK and our DM does not pull punches. In fact, when the fight is getting longer or deadlier, he starts rolling on our side of the screen. I think he does it just to see the grimaces and hear the cries of dismay when he rolls the inevitable 20s so common for DMs yet so elusive to players.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

When I play plan A is whatever the consensus of the group is. Plan B are the emergency magic items and casters with evac and croud control spells.

When I DM, that's their problem.

 

[barsoomcore]

I've DMed one TPK in recent memory -- and it was a "no planning" situation rather than a "bad planning" situation.

It was the cloaker in the first Dungeon Adventure Path module, "Life's Bazaar" -- the party basically went after it one at a time, allowing it to focus its attacks on each PC individually. It was brilliant. The rogue is investigating the stage and the roper pops up, surprises him (bad Listen roll), and disables him in the first round. One fighter charges in while the rest of the party "watches the exits". Fighter misses, gets smacked by full attack, goes down. Next round the sorcerer decides to clamber up on the stage, gets smacked, goes down. Next round the cleric, and finally the barbarian. Each round, one character attacked the beastie, each round that character missed and died.

So I try to encourage planning...

 

[The_Universe]

My players suck at planning. I love them to death, but they couldn't plan their way out of a wet paper bag.

Player 1 is a deep roleplayer - "My character wouldn't make a plan. He'd just rush in."

Player 2 doesn't deal well with 'what if' scenarios, "How can we plan out how to scale the wall if we don't know what color and what material the wall is? I need to know the exact number of guards on duty before we can decide anything."

Player 3 goes too far with what if scenarios. "We know the guards were wearing shoes...that means that the King is actually a disguised mindflayer, and the wall is actually an illusion! Disbelieve and walk through the wall! Kill the king!"

Player 4 doesn't pay any attention to planning, "OK - I know that this is important and all, but when can we kill something? Can't we just walk over there and kill someone? It can't hurt, right?"

Player 5 loves complicated multi-step plans. "By placing this basket here and having you shoot it with an arrow, we can set off a chain of events that might, if everything goes perfectly, spill milk near this thirsty camel, which will then stand up, utimately causing the downfall of society."

Player 6 has a good grasp of strategy and tactics, but is too grounded in the real world, "we'll sweep through here, using attack plan delta. Bob - take point!" "What if they cast a fireball at us?" "DM, do they have to use magic?"

Put them together, add in an insistence on seeking complete consensus before doing anything, and you've got my gang! God help them!