Rat Bastard Reccomendations

[kaomera]

So, the thread on rat-bastard DMs has led me to thinking about some things, including some of my DMing experiences that did not work out as well as I had hoped...

So I was thinking that I would recount one (perhaps more, later) of these experiences in the hopes that some of the other DMs here (and RBDMs in particular) might comment and perhaps offer me some advice... (And if anyone else wants to add their own experiences to this thread for similar consideration, that sounds like fun, too!)

I ran a game a few years ago wherein the PCs ended up chasing after a cursed treasure. By good roleplay they had learned from a crazy sea-witch of a cursed pirate's compass, that would lead it's bearers to fabulous treasures, but only at the cost of the life of one of the crew (or party-members, in the PCs' case). One player, in particular, was very vehement (in the face of a couple of other players who where rather prone to acting in haste) that the PCs would not be using the compass - they would acquire it, kill off the other pirates who where after it, and then sell it (to someone less cunning then themselves) for quite a fabulous price, and that would be it. The players seemed to think that this was a foolproof plan (and I did not feel compelled to tell them if I perhaps felt that it was not quite so).

In the course of defeating the pirates (very handily - they massacred the named NPCs before they even had a chance to act and the rest scattered) the PCs became rather spectacularly separated. One of them, specifically the character of the player who had argued against using the compass, found himself treading water in a large half-flooded chamber without a light source. Suddenly, he noticed a twinkling light down on the floor of the cavern, and diving down he found the compass lying atop a battered chest. He retrieved the compass and retreated to a dry ledge he had noticed by it's blinking light.

One of the other PCs had gotten herself trapped in an airbubble at the end of a flooded corridor, and by way of a slight miscalculation had endangered her precarious refuge therein. Attempting to flee back the way she had come, she panicked, ended up swimming in circles through silt-darkened waters, and eventually drowned. She may or not have made it out otherwise, but the penalties imposed on her rolls by the curse (which I had penned very specific mechanics for) certainly didn't help. And with her death, of course, the curse was fulfilled and the penalties lifted (at least until the next time the compass led them to treasure).

Well, the players' didn't think this was cool, they didn't think it was at all fair, and they didn't think it was clever. Which bothered me quite a bit because usually they where cool, even when things didn't go their way. Unfortunately things got a bit heated and I decided it would be best to deal with the situation at the next session, which unfortunately never happened. Scheduling conflicts spoiled our next two attempts to get together, and after that several of the core members where no longer available and the group just kind of fell apart for good... I don't think this was a direct and specific response to the last session we played, but I have to kind of wonder if it didn't play some part...

So: should this have been a good RBDM moment, or was I just being jerky? I don't enjoy killing off PCs and usually go a ways to avoid it (in favor of something “worse” happening), but in this case it seemed the only really appropriate thing to do: the curse was specifically designed so that someone had to die before the effects would end. And the PCs could have located the body and gotten a Raise, it was just going to be a major pain (plus unless they tossed the compass first the curse would have just come back...).

 

[ggroy]

Well, the players' didn't think this was cool, they didn't think it was at all fair, and they didn't think it was clever. Which bothered me quite a bit because usually they where cool, even when things didn't go their way. Unfortunately things got a bit heated and I decided it would be best to deal with the situation at the next session, which unfortunately never happened. Scheduling conflicts spoiled our next two attempts to get together, and after that several of the core members where no longer available and the group just kind of fell apart for good... I don't think this was a direct and specific response to the last session we played, but I have to kind of wonder if it didn't play some part...

For me it would be highly dependent on the particular group. There generally tends to be two group types:

"Type 1" - If a group was formed from me personally recruiting the other players, usually I tend to be a lot less of a rat bastard DM. The act of me having to recruit other players, generally does not put me in a position to bargain with the players as easily, as to how the game is conducted.

"Type 2" - In contrast, if I was asked to DM a game by a group of players, I may have greater leeway in bargaining with the players, as to how the game is conducted.


The vast majority of groups I've played with over the years which at some point abruptly fell apart, were almost always the "type 1" groups. (Sometimes I was the DM. Other times I was a player). Frequently the DM of a "type 1" group was doing stuff the recruited players did not agree with, for which particular players abruptly walked out from the game and didn't come back. In other cases, sometimes the DM abruptly quit when the players didn't fit in with the DM's expectations.

The times I was recruited by a group of players to take up the DM chair (ie. "type 2" group), I had significantly more leeway as to how the game was conducted. I told the players what my DM'ing style was like, and the intricate details of how I conducted the game. This left very little room for any misunderstandings. They knew what they were getting into. They were to take it or leave it. (If we didn't come to an agreement, we parted ways without ever playing a single session).

 

[Pbartender]

So: should this have been a good RBDM moment, or was I just being jerky? I don't enjoy killing off PCs and usually go a ways to avoid it (in favor of something “worse” happening), but in this case it seemed the only really appropriate thing to do: the curse was specifically designed so that someone had to die before the effects would end. And the PCs could have located the body and gotten a Raise, it was just going to be a major pain (plus unless they tossed the compass first the curse would have just come back...).

The problem here is that the players didn't really seem to have a choice in the matter. Judging just from what you posted here, it seems like the players had made the choice to not use the compass, thereby giving up fabulous treasure but keeping everyone alive. The consequence for doing this was that they ended up with a curse anyway (by way of penalties), they ran across fabulous treasure by accident, and someone died anyway.

In the end, the player's choice made no difference. That is the biggest sin an aspiring RBDM can make.

Here's an example of a similar situation I had with my players recently...

The players are hunting down a dark gnome from the Shadowfell who had been selling mercenaries and weapons to orc tribes that are at war with a dwarven kingdom. He hard to find, and eventually the PCs are directed to inquire at the lair of a red dragon in a nearby volcano.

When they arrive, they soon realize that dragon is a Vecnite -- in fact, the PCs strongly suspect that one of the dragon's eyes is the legendary and infamous Eye of Vecna. (It is... The dragon is a holdover from a bit of rat bastardry in a previous campaign, where the players unknowingly got a hold of the Eye of Vecna, and then accidentally let this dragon get a hold of it before they realized what it was.) The dragon is being as hospitable as dragons ever are, and so they start dealing with him.

They ask him if he can tell them what they want to know... He counters by offering them what they need to know. They ask his price. "Him," the dragon says, pointing to the priestly PC with the tattoo of Ioun on his forehead (a PC, incidentally, that was going to be retired and replaced anyway). After a lengthy discussion, they decline. "Are you certain?" he asks. "Yes," they insist. "Very well, I'll tell you what you want to know in exchange for your brass key." (The brass key is one of a few that activates a portal that leads back to the material plane.) They agree, since they know where to get another one, and he tells him where this dark gnome will be and when so they can go catch him.

Now, there's two difficult decisions going on... The first is whether it was worth trading the life of a PC for the information they need (the who, what, where and when of an extra-planar invasion that they've heard vague rumors about). The second is whether or not to give a dragon on his way to demi-lichdom access to the material plane in exchange for the location of a bounty they were hunting.

They made their decisions, and there will be long-lasting consequences for both decisions... By the time learn the details of the invasion, it may very well be too late, and thousands may have already died. Not to mention the fact that they have unleashed the future avatar of Vecna upon the world, who will surely turn up again either in this campaign or the next.



So what could you have done? Let it go... let them sell it to some chump. Some chump, who is far less scrupulous than the PCs and is willing wantonly kill people to find the fabulous treasure. Someone who becomes wealthy and powerful, and is much later a thorn in the sides of the PCs. Far down the road, long after they've forgotten the compass, it resurfaces to cause them trouble again... And, of course, it's all their own fault, because they're the ones who decided to sell it to this up-and-coming villain.

 

[kaomera]

The problem here is that the players didn't really seem to have a choice in the matter. Judging just from what you posted here, it seems like the players had made the choice to not use the compass, thereby giving up fabulous treasure but keeping everyone alive. The consequence for doing this was that they ended up with a curse anyway (by way of penalties), they ran across fabulous treasure by accident, and someone died anyway.

The players did make a decision not to use the compass. Specifically, they decided that they could still get the fabulous treasure without endangering themselves. They where even correct, up to a point. And they did run across the treasure (the compass) partially by accident, but they wouldn't have actually found it if it hadn't led them to itself. And the penalties where the curse: there was no chance to get out of the curse by making a sacrifice. Everyone in the "crew" was subjected to Muphy's Law, amplified until one of them died, or they got rid of the treasure.

Now, the thought that I was being entirely too clever for my own good here has certainly crossed my mind. Maybe I was a bit too flowery in my description above. I kind of wanted to see if anyone would "figure it out". It can be a fine line between "clever" and "obtuse" sometimes. The players figured out that the compass was a trap, they just seemed to think that was the end of things. They thought they had a clever way to get around the curse, but I thought I had a way to out-clever them.

Here's how I saw things: The compass was, in and of itself, a fabulous treasure. The PCs knew this: they could sell it for quite a lot to a crew willing to gamble with their lives for even more than they had paid. They also knew the compass was cursed, and it took a life every time it led a "crew" (in this case the party) to a treasure.

The PCs could have found it without it leading them to itself, but they didn't. The PC who picked it up (or his player, really) could have realized that something was up, but he didn't. Under other circumstances it might well have turned out differently. Had the party not split there would have been more PCs there when he found the compass, possibly leading to further insights and definitely meaning a light-source, which would have made the blinking trick mostly moot. Or he could have had some sort of backup light source, but he didn't. The pirates had a map of the mini-dungeon they where in, but they didn't stop to search the bodies. And had one of the other party members not been putting herself at serious risk at the same time as he found the compass there would have been more time for him to figure out that he wasn't getting away scott-free with the treasure, and dump it. But, IMO, those where all consequences of choices the players made.

I wasn't planning on letting them get their hands on the compass without triggering the curse if I could help it. And the players gave me the opportunity to stop them. To me it seemed as if the players had decided that as long as they did not deliberately subject themselves to the curse, it couldn't hurt them. That seems to me like deciding that you can take all of the dragon's treasure and it can't do anything about it if you just refuse to roll initiative. Or maybe a better comparison would be finding a pressure plate in a hallway, and figuring there's no way it could possibly go if you walk across it without making a deliberate attempt to trigger it...

I dunno, I hope I'm not coming off as all defensive about this. Obviously there was a breakdown in expectations here. I could have let get away with the compass, or even just not let them find it. But I wanted to be able to say "close, but no cigar". I didn't want to show them that coming up with a plan (ie: don't follow the compass to treasure) and then not actually following through on it 100% was enough.

 

[kaomera]

The problem here is that the players didn't really seem to have a choice in the matter.

Although... Now that I've posted the above wall-of-text, I think this is probably the core of the matter. The players thought I had short-circuited their choice in the matter, and really I did. I felt justified because I didn't really feel that their choice was as valid or clever as they thought, but obviously I didn't convince them...

 

[Abraxas]

The players did make a decision not to use the compass. Specifically, they decided that they could still get the fabulous treasure without endangering themselves. They where even correct, up to a point. And they did run across the treasure (the compass) partially by accident, but they wouldn't have actually found it if it hadn't led them to itself.

The problem I see with your description is in the text I quoted. It led them to itself - they didn't use it - it used them. At least that's the way I would interpret things.

How far would you have taken this? The player's character is treading water and notices a blinking light. The character swims down to investigate and finds the compass - but this time doesn't pick it up. Has he still used it by the mere fact that he went to investigate? It did, according to your description lead him to a fabulous treasure.

I'm not trying to pick on you, you just have an example of the attempted RBDM tactics that I have been subjected to most.

 

[Pbartender]

I felt justified because I didn't really feel that their choice was as valid or clever as they thought, but obviously I didn't convince them...

Why should you convince them? Let them be clever now and again.

Constant adversity is frustrating, boring drudgery. Adversity interspersed with brilliant successes is adventure.

 

[kaomera]

The problem I see with your description is in the text I quoted. It led them to itself - they didn't use it - it used them. At least that's the way I would interpret things.

Yeah, I can see the point of that. I was actively screwing with the PCs at that point - it could have just remained dark and they wouldn't have found it (immediately). It was mostly just random circumstance that resulted in a PC being in the same chamber as the compass, in the dark. I didn't set that up, but I certainly seized the opportunity. I expected the PCs to eventually find it on their own, and I would not have been able to legitimately apply the curse at that point.

There was an specific "out" in that the curse could be avoided / ended by getting rid of the treasure (spending / selling it didn't count, but they could just drop it - they didn't need to drag it back to where they found it or anything), so not taking the compass would have been a good choice. But there was an issue that once we got to that point there wasn't really a good way for the PCs to get the compass without it counting...

Once the compass had led the character to itself, I'm not sure how they could have grabbed it without setting it off. I figured it was ok if the PCs didn't get ahold of it (otherwise I wouldn't have had a curse on it in the first place), and I think that was the main issue. I think the players really thought it was theirs (or as good as) once they "figured out" that they shouldn't actively use it. There didn't really seem to me to be a good way for me to tell them that their plan wasn't as foolproof as they seemed to think...

 

[kaomera]

Why should you convince them? Let them be clever now and again.

Because it didn't seem clever to me. I can see that, given that they didn't seem to think I was being clever either, I should have just let it go. But it seemed like a kinda dumb plan, that might actually have worked if they had managed to stick to it. I managed to pretty much screw them out of being able to do that (and I think dumb luck had quite a bit to do with it too).

It did seem to me obvious (more obvious than for the players, I guess) that there was something active going on here, which I thought should have at least aroused suspicions. If there had been any light source in the chamber, I wouldn't have tried the blinking-light trick. At that point it could have been mistaken for a reflection or something. I felt that once something weird (or at least out of the ordinary) was going on, they would have gotten a little cautious and thought things through.

Constant adversity is frustrating, boring drudgery. Adversity interspersed with brilliant successes is adventure.

Oh, I agree with that entirely.

 

[Pbartender]

It did seem to me obvious (more obvious than for the players, I guess)...

This is not an uncommon problem... It's something I struggled with for a long time.

You have to remember that from behind the DM screen, you've already got the big picture and you've got all the answers. From that perspective, many of the clues, possible plans of action, and intuitive leaps of deduction that are meant to advance the plot and keep the PCs out of trouble will seem obvious.

On the players' side of things, however, they only have the parts of the puzzle that you give them. They are almost always looking at an incomplete picture. Things that are completely obvious to you will be completely obscure to them, and things that seem to be of tantamount importance to them will be meaningless off-hand details to you.

As Obi-Wan Kenobi said, "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

That holds true for DMing and gaming as well...

For you, "The compass will lead you to a great treasure," was a specific semantic clue to the trap that is the curse. From the players' point of view, it's simply a description of the compasses function. How are the players supposed to realize that the compass itself is the "great treasure"? After all, from the standpoint of an adventurer, a compass that only leads to itself is next to useless.

But in the end, the point is that is doesn't really matter whether or not you think their plan is clever. That they think it's clever is enough.

It's not really your job circumvent the players' plan based on its cleverness. It's up to you to decide how difficult it should be for that plan to succeed (there should always be at least some minimal chance to succeed, no matter how difficult or dangerous that chance is), what the logical (and sometimes devious) consequences of success or failure are, and to perhaps give some mildly obvious hints of the possible dangers and consequences (if it seems reasonable that the PCs could figure such things out for themselves).