Rant: The Best Laid Plans... (Long)

GQuail

Explorer
This is more a blowing off steam thing, but I'd be interested in your comments, and in any similar stories you have.

Like many of you, my group of players are not evenly enthusiastic in the game. I've an 8 man group and while a couple are especially keen (almost daily MSN chats about D&D, regular contributions to our campaign wiki including our story hour-style "infodumps", copying out spells from books I buy to expand their electronic spellbooks, etc) but others aren't. Similarly, some players can be pretty much guaranteed to attend every session, whereas others are more likely to flake: work commitments being the big thing which forces some people to miss partyor all of a session.

Now, this has a sort of knock-on effect of making some players have more "spotlight time". The players who spend more time designing character backgrounds are easier to drop hitns for: and those who attend more simply build up bigger webs of connections. I will freely admit, for example, that my girlfriend is one player who tends to get a lot of such time: but that's mainly because, by living with me, she's almost always guaranteed to be at a session. ;-)

I decided I wanted to tilt this balance back to some of the quieter players, including one in paticular: he plays a Dwarf Wizard called Ogri. Ogri has short man syndrome out the wazoo, years of Dwarves picking on him because he became a wizard instead of a "real man" making him a loose cannon who drinks hard, blasts fireballs and pees at least once in a surprisingly large number of encounters. The player is one of the quieter ones who tends to arrives a little later to session than others because his work is further away: I've in the past not been sure about giving him much in the way of long term plots because it's been awkward to resolve them the next week if he's late, but I decided I had a cunning plan to fix him.

The Book Of Vile Darkness lists a drug called Terran Brandy: magical booze, made from dead fey, which causes Con damage but gives a temporary boost to caster level. Suffice to say, "Dwarf Wizard" and "magical but addictive drink" is a match made in heaven: and the party had just gained a Satyr cleric as well! The player could encounter the drink in a veiled way, and from there he will probably purchase and use it: and when the addictiion kicks in, he can either ignore it, sit out the pain (Dwarf saves to Poison, and all that) and get back on the road, or if he wants to RP it there's room for all kinds of fun: especially if later on his Satyr friend gets followed by the same people who sell him the drink....

So I finally have a good plotline for Ogri, and I can make him feel a bit more directly involved. Alas, no sooner do I formulate this than Ogri's player says he has to b ow out for the moment. Work just got a hell of a lot worse, and he can't promise to make any sessions for the moment: he's been temporarilly relocated from Scotland to Ireland (!) and then after the lack of managers in his business means he's forced to work a hell of a lot more late shifts. Fair enough: I wonder if he's partly chucking it because he isn't getting as much in the way of spotlight time, but he assures me he'd love to come back when he has the time.

Well, a few months later, he has the time, and though the party are in later stages of a dungeon crawl they find a way to slip him back into the group. He says he's with us for the long term, though he may still have to miss a session every few weeks when late shift work comes up. I vow to try and make him more involved this time, but momentum of other stuff the PCs have done in his absence takes priority: there's a dungeon to finish, and then a missing artifact to recover, and then a party member is finally arrested for a crime he committed.... It takes a few sessions to get the group back in town and relatively neutral. In this time Ogri behaves a little more violent than usual, tending to his spells with less and less provocation, but I take this as partly RPing personality changes and partly that the player may just be a bit bored from a few "talky" sessions (since I was counterbalancing for the rest of the party with the recent dungeon crawl) and wants to get t o the "good bit".

Last session, we're finally in a decent point to proceed. The group has a new arc that has them travelling by boat almost a thousand miles, and before they go a mage they owe a favour to (he identified an evil artifact for them without telling anyone else what it was) asks them to ship a crate of brandy to his friend in the same town. The Dwarf recognises the friends name as a classmate at University, but his ears prick up at the mention of magical booze. (And my other players start to laugh, and one comments thjat "some players are more predictable than others, eh, GQuail?) He is offered a snifter to test, he passes his addiction save (but I was going for the long term...) and he notes it's effect: the trap is laid.

And then, things go horrible. Before departing the group get into one last combat: but the combat is started by the group just as Ogri's secondary damage from the Terran Brandy kicks in. We RP this Con damage as being intense stomach pain, so he's sitting outside when they get into trouble inside the house. The combat is only one round, because it's a pretty brief and violent affair: a single mage holds them to a Mexican Standoff with a metamagiced firebal ready to slay their Wild Shaped and unconscious Druid, but the Barbarian manages to spring in from the side, takes the fireball himself, and the group drop the mage.

Ogri arrives after all this has finished: he spent the firs tturn making himself invisible and moving into the house, and by the time he moves in the mage is on the ground. The party heal up the mage, planning to interrogate her: but Ogri is all invsibiled up, tense, and is not about to leave without showing off his spells. The Satyr hears him in the room (her listen is stupidly high) and attempts to stop him from doing anything stupid: trying to catch the invisible mage, trying to use Silence to prevent spells from being cast, even moving herself in the way so he can't use spells like Lightning Bolt. But in the end he moves in, and beheads the mage.

The party go spare as the Wizard appears. Harsh words are exchanged, the barbarian grapples Ogri and the Satyr goes utterly spare that the women she was healing exploded in front of her. At least one party member storms out, and as the city watch arrive to sound of the carnage inside, they hand over OGri to the authorities.

After ICly arguments and OOCly discussions, the group are a bit unsure of how to move on from here. Ogri is pretty impossible to put back into the group: the Satyr is just too far gone with him for what he did, and they're loathe to kick /her/ PC out of the group since she seemed to be perfectly reasonable. Ogri's player will probalby need to roll up a new PC, which means all this time on the Terran Brandy plot is kinda wasted: and worse still, the Terran Brandy plot actually ended up /part of the reason/ why his PC has to go! :-(

I don't totally feel this is my fault: part of it was the PC being Chaotic Stupid and ignoring the other PC's pretty clear wishes. But I feel like I should hav said to him, explicitly, "If you do this, the rest of the party will go utterly, utterly spare."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Something that I used to do was over plot. I used to make way too many detailed PC related plans. This might work for some players, not all. Also, this plot point might seem like something that is reasonable and fun from your point of view. It might not seem that way for the player since he does not know the whole plot. As such, he might feel like you are discreminating against him. As always it is a good idea to discusss what happened with all the players and see how to proceed.
 

It's frustrating when entire plotlines go wonky like that, I know. But I really think that the player having his PC act so recklessly was the problem, not your plans for him.
 

Ah, the lure of non-sequiturs. One of my favorite moments from Terry Pratchet's Diskworld novels is when the scheming lords of Ank-Morkpork have told one of the City Watch that he's a descendant of the king and the only response they can get out of him is

"But Cmdr. Vimes, He'll go SPARE!"

"Ah, but you'd be King. You could order him not to."

"But Cmdr. Vimes, He'll go SPARE!"

Back to the topic. Shilsen the DM for my Saturday campaign simply flat out forbids player conficts of this sort. Because you will sometimes wind up with exactly the results you got. Note, he doesn't forbid arguments and friction between players and there's been plenty between my mage and the Paladin in the party. However precisely because of his restriction it's never actually come to blows, which it probably would have, had there been no ban.

Next time I would just simply tell the player that you won't permit him to take that sort of action, precisely because it will break up the party.
 

Waylander the Slayer said:
Something that I used to do was over plot. I used to make way too many detailed PC related plans. This might work for some players, not all. Also, this plot point might seem like something that is reasonable and fun from your point of view. It might not seem that way for the player since he does not know the whole plot. As such, he might feel like you are discreminating against him. As always it is a good idea to discusss what happened with all the players and see how to proceed.

Yeah, perhaps there's an overplotting angle to it. I put way more interest in this Terran Brandy thing than he has any reason to think. ;-)

Speaking to the others, most of them would like to keep Ogri about, although acknowledge that right now that's awkward: and with a couple of PC changeovers recently, the Satyr is the only good character in the group right now, so they're reluctant to throw her out. The chat seems to be that the player rolls up a new PC, and then the old one is dealt with as an NPC and taken "out of the loop".

There are complications ICly: the absence of the player OOC lead to Ogri's absence ICly, so to the playesr he's been different since he came back, which has made some of them suspicious. I think it's possible some might see this as a sign something is wrong with Ogri and investigate, something I could play up later on to try and work him back in.
 

Rackhir said:
Back to the topic. Shilsen the DM for my Saturday campaign simply flat out forbids player conficts of this sort. Because you will sometimes wind up with exactly the results you got. Note, he doesn't forbid arguments and friction between players and there's been plenty between my mage and the Paladin in the party. However precisely because of his restriction it's never actually come to blows, which it probably would have, had there been no ban.

Next time I would just simply tell the player that you won't permit him to take that sort of action, precisely because it will break up the party.

Yeah, I do feel that I should have interceded. At the same time, though, at least one of the players has said that, as rough as things got, he would have arguably been more unhappy if I'd said to Ogri's player "you can't do that."

There were clear hints from the other players as to that htey were unhappy with Ogri's actions, so it's not like he did it and it kinda came to light - they were there fighting him and he ignored them. I wondered if this is partly a "cry for help" from the PC who wa swas looking for more combat after a few talky sessions, but talking to the PC it was a genuine roleplaying thing. (Albeit a distruptive one that I don't think he realised would piss of the other players)

I do think that, if this came up again, I would probably call a time out and ask the players, "what will happen if this happens?". If the player still wants to do it, then at lkeast he can't act surprised. ;-)
 

GQuail said:
Yeah, I do feel that I should have interceded. At the same time, though, at least one of the players has said that, as rough as things got, he would have arguably been more unhappy if I'd said to Ogri's player "you can't do that."

There were clear hints from the other players as to that htey were unhappy with Ogri's actions, so it's not like he did it and it kinda came to light - they were there fighting him and he ignored them. I wondered if this is partly a "cry for help" from the PC who wa swas looking for more combat after a few talky sessions, but talking to the PC it was a genuine roleplaying thing. (Albeit a distruptive one that I don't think he realised would piss of the other players)

I do think that, if this came up again, I would probably call a time out and ask the players, "what will happen if this happens?". If the player still wants to do it, then at lkeast he can't act surprised. ;-)

Tell him "You're a clever person. Come up with an IC reason not to do this." It also helps if you have this established as a policy up front. Obviously it's too late for that, but you can always lay it down as the law for the next session.
 

Sorry you had to go through that.

That does seem to be the problem with allowed interplayer conflict. Though the benefits are great, (realism) the negatives can sometimes sink a campaign (too personal). In this situation there were several things the DM might have done to step in, all of which are fiat. As he's sneaking through the house invisible, give him another stomach ache, he trips over something. This doesn't have to be mechanical, but his stomach could have been growling, making listen checks a bit more noticeable. (my group would have had some great comic relief with that one). He also could have vomited sometime during the sneak or before hew as about to give that final blow to the mage.

Sometimes being a DM means being a psychologist (which sucks). You deal with alot of personalities and you really got to figure out if people are taking some things personally or are they just in character really good.

For instance, you figured out that the party wants to interrogate this prisoner and the player needs to participate in the combat (probably tired of those talky sessions u mentioned). Realizing that the two can not mix in its current state, you could have also provided 3 or 4 hidden henchmen to appear from a floorboard below, provide the satyr wit ha reflex save to pull the bad mage out of the way (with bonuses added to her score because it was cast by a drunken dwarf) or pull the old it was really a simulcram dealleo. Essentially you only needed to create one more round as a DM to get things under control, by then the barbarian would have grappled him and explained to him what was going on, he'd have cast his super cool spell, and eveyrone would have had drinks at the winchester.

Perhaps this can rectify itself. If this character still wants to play this Ogly character, and if you guys ar ethe only witnesses, perhaps you make up a story of how this wizard attacked you and it was self defense. Then tell the player that ogly would probably be pretty remorseful for killing an innocent person. Hopefully the court will go lenient on him, providing him some sort of curse instead of jail.

1 Perhaps making him permenantly forget the spell or unable to cast the spell
2 Pay back restitution to his family
3 JOin an alcholic anonomous group, anger management classes
 

DonTadow said:
Perhaps this can rectify itself. If this character still wants to play this Ogly character, and if you guys ar ethe only witnesses, perhaps you make up a story of how this wizard attacked you and it was self defense. Then tell the player that ogly would probably be pretty remorseful for killing an innocent person. Hopefully the court will go lenient on him, providing him some sort of curse instead of jail.

1 Perhaps making him permenantly forget the spell or unable to cast the spell
2 Pay back restitution to his family
3 JOin an alcholic anonomous group, anger management classes

I really like some of the elements of this idea. The person they killed did steal a book of dubious magical incantations, and is a member of a Dragon Cult which has been responsible for a few shady things in the city: if these mitigating circumstances come out, the character can indeed be treated lightly. The other players will still be pretty unchuffed, but I do like the idea of his punishment being to attend meetins where drunk spellcasters discuss the stupid stuff they've done int he past under the influence of drink: it can be both silly and actually quite grim, depending on how the player wants to take it.
 

GQuail said:
I really like some of the elements of this idea. The person they killed did steal a book of dubious magical incantations, and is a member of a Dragon Cult which has been responsible for a few shady things in the city: if these mitigating circumstances come out, the character can indeed be treated lightly. The other players will still be pretty unchuffed, but I do like the idea of his punishment being to attend meetins where drunk spellcasters discuss the stupid stuff they've done int he past under the influence of drink: it can be both silly and actually quite grim, depending on how the player wants to take it.
Not sure if you like PDfs or not, but there's a pretty cool pdf out at rpgnow called crime and punishment. It has some really good ideas for punishing characters so that the character can still remain in the game, but still face consequences for wrongdoings. I doubt they have the alcholoic spellcaster anonomous in there ;), but they may have some interesting things in there to make sure and monitor the spellcaster is going to his sessions.
 

Remove ads

Top