RBDM - How?

Pbartender said:
Now, a lot of people are talking about giving the players rope to hang themselves with, misdirecting the players, having serious consequences for their action, and such. That all great, but there's one critical piece that's missing...

A chance of success.

No matter what they do, no matter how slim the odds, you always need to give the players a chance to succeed. Doing everything else suggested here, while failing to give your players the hope of winning, will only turn them into churlish, sullen, cynical, frustrated players who never stick their characters' collective necks out, because either A) it's likely to get them killed or B) they'll almost certainly fail somehow or C) both.

Remember, Pavlov showed that the most effective positive reinforcement is occasional but unpredictable success. Letting your players "win" spectacularly from time to time gives them enough confidence and trust in you, the DM, to make it through the shocking Rat Bastard moments with good-natured aplomb.

In other words, give your players enough wiggle room to be Rat Bastard Player Characters.
Damn good point. The PCs in my campaign actually succeed all the time - eventually. It just involves a fair amount of suffering along the way and the impression that they're digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole while the universe is out to get them too. If it was only the second part without the success, then it would be really lousy for the players. But the successes make the suffering both worthwhile and (barely) bearable.

Partly the same logic applies to the fact that I don't kill PCs, having put rules in place to prevent PC death. Killing PCs takes little talent and does not a RBDM make. Making PCs wish that they were dead so that the suffering stops, but just short of the point where they'd actually be willing to off themselves - now that takes talent.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

To give you a better image of how far my PCs are along, Here is the map of the town. Areas 1, 20, 2, and 4 aren't actual encounter sites. The PCs have cleared areas 6, (some of) 7, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19. They're currently in 3, and have explored or wiped out most of it. I've treated the place as a sandbox dungeon - the PCs choose which building to go into next, or have been lured into the perspective buildings, rather than it be a linear progression (initially they were going clockwise through the town, sweeping through the perimeter).

Kid Charlemagne said:
Starting with the colony location, the first thing that occurs to me is to wonder about motivations for sending a new group of colonists. Perhaps the Crown has a batch of refugees that are troublesome for one reason or another, and they actually hope the colony gets wiped out? Or perhaps there is some kind of resource there that they feel is too valuable to let go unexploited, in which case, the PC's could be faced at the end of the year with the new "management" that comes in being clearly looking to exploit both the resources and the colonists, with little regard for the work the PC's have done. This could set up some nice conflict later on, and could be something you could build towards over time. It's also a good place to use Shilsen's "Schroedinger's Plot", as you don't have to decide WHO the new guys taking over will be until they step off the boat; politics could cause things to change at any point. I'd be trying to involve them in royal intrigues - making them wonder who they can really rely on. This will help set up things later on, I think.

Food for thought. I think that originally the Aundairians just expect the place to get wiped out again, and so it's a convenient way of getting rid of all the Cyrans, while looking like a good PR move. "Sure! We'll give you your own little track of land! Whoops, you're dead. Well, we tried! See?" But, there's going to be a fairly large deposit of Khyber dragonshards nearby, which is going to turn the colony into a mining town, I suspect.

And the Queen isn't going to let go of the deed to a place with obvious room for exploitation.

I'm keeping them out at first. The PCs right now are just 4th level, and I'm trying to keep a more 'immediate to medium' level of planning. Online games take forever.

She could be playing it safe, being a little helpful here and there with potions and divinations, while occasionally giving in to the "bake a small child into a pie" urges that make hags fun.
I'm using a Dusk Hag (Sandstorm), and while it gives little info about their personality in general, I picture her as seeing herself as the local desert mystic queen. There are worse stuff out there than her, and she runs a tight ship in her little tract of land.
 
Last edited:

shilsen said:
Damn good point. The PCs in my campaign actually succeed all the time - eventually. It just involves a fair amount of suffering along the way and the impression that they're digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole while the universe is out to get them too. If it was only the second part without the success, then it would be really lousy for the players. But the successes make the suffering both worthwhile and (barely) bearable.
It makes the success have that much more impact on the players as well. They feel like they earned it, rather than it being a given outcome.
 

Ah yes, the false friend, evil patron, inocent enemy..."grendels mother" seeking revenge, forces of law seeking justice...and giving the PCs enough rope to hang themselves with. It can all be good fun.

While I have done all of the above and more, used some nasty tricks and traps (got to love old school adventures), and like to think I am a pretty good tactician (or at least can get monsters to punch above their weight and cream the party when they normally wouldn't), I have in the past pulled my punches, especially early in campaings. This can make it harder to really bring the hurt latter, since it may know feel "wrong" and inconsistent with the earlier part of the campaing, like you are breaking some unwritten rule.

So I would add one thing I would add: set the tone early. It should not be constant, but pretty early on, the PCs should learn that you will hurt them, or at least let them hurt themselves.
 

So…

The PCs are framed for a crime they did not commit.

Then they are convicted, sans benefit of a trial.

A “friend of the party” and representative from some shadow organization makes a deal with the PCs to perform dangerous missions rather than being executed. Further, they are told if they perform X number of missions, they will be granted their freedom.

Their heroic deeds are attributed to others.

It’s a lie – they will never be granted their freedom. Their “friend” set them up from the beginning and they learn all this as a TPK unfolds.
 

The Grumpy Celt said:
It’s a lie – they will never be granted their freedom. Their “friend” set them up from the beginning and they learn all this as a TPK unfolds.

That doesn't sound like a heck of a lot of fun. Now if you do most of this, and then let them have a chance of getting back at their "friend" and recover their place and position, that would be all different.
 

The best method I've found for being a RBDM has nothing at all to do slaughtering the party. That's not fun; in fact, a DM can slaughter a party of PCs any time he chooses to. As folks have said up-thread, the real joy of rat bastardy is allowing the players to make meaningful choices that both make the game more fun for everyone, and which leave the PCs in horrible trouble due to their own decisions.

An example: the first RB trick I can remember pulling was back in 2e. A magicuser PC used a crystal ball in a hostile dungeon and caught a glimpse of a beautiful young girl, chained and miserable. He scried her, as I thought he would, and she explained she was to be sacrificed to release a fiendish princess from captivity. The party rushed to her rescue and obeyed all of her suggestions... and of course, it was a cursed crystal hypnosis ball and she was the fiendish princess being held captive. The rest of the campaign was spent trying to make up for their embarrassing, horrible mistake.

So what's the best way to make your players love you and want to headbutt you at the same time? Twist their expectations. Think about what the obvious result of an action might be, then change it so that it catches the PCs off-guard. Does a doppelganger escape? Instead of having him mug the PCs in a dark alley, he kills a politician and makes their families' lives difficult. Are they working for a venerable wizard who might secretly be a bad guy? He isn't, but an evil third party is planting evidence that makes them think he is.

The trick here is that all these changes lead to greater adventure, and thus to more fun. A change that becomes "and now the PCs are all dead, ha ha" doesn't turn out to be fun for anyone.
 

As Darklone, Piratecat, and others have said -- any DM can kill a party. A RBDM can make them suffer, and a good way to do that is to make their own actions backfire on them.

MarauderX did this to our group for months -- every time we thought we had done something good, it turned out to make things worse. We were pretty sure we were bringing about the apocalypse through our ill-informed good intentions. Actually, I was getting so frustrated that I was almost ready to give up on playing a good-aligned PC in his campaign, until we finally started seeing who was manipulating the outcomes all of our good deeds...

Which brings us to point #2 -- have someone for the PCs to focus their hatred on when they get frustrated.

Somewhat contradicting this, but a key to long-term success, is point #3 -- never let them learn everything. Have numerous factions on the scene (including some secret ones) and limit the flow of information. In most TV sci-fi and fantasy, the heroes figure out the enemy plot because of incredible guesswork or luck or stupidity on the enemy's part. If you ignore this contrivance, NOBODY is going to figure out the nuances of the mind flayers' plot. It will have layers upon layers and there is basically no chance it will be tracked back to the illithid (well, except for Commune -- you need some way to counter this spell). Babylon 5 did this well -- Sheridan & Co. never figured out the Drakh were behind the Centauri attacks of Season 5. The Drakh were just too good.
 

Piratecat, I grovel before thee.

May an inkling of thy ratbastardy be bestowed upon my humble form. :P

As a note: Total agreement here. Players are VERY good at screwing things up. A touch of faux-malicious creativity can make the whole thing perfect.
 

You need to construct a world that the characters and the players care about. This means locations that include 'touchstones'. It means NPCs that the players can love hating, as well as love rooting for and helping. It means plots that the plahyers choose to be involved in.

Choice is a powerful tool in the RBDM toolbox. The players choose to have their characters involved in the campaign elements. This doesn't mean that they have to choose every element. But it does mean you, as the DM, are looking for something special in every choice the players do make. These choices, where the players tell you (though not always directly) what they care about, will become the elements that you may, or may not, twist in unusual directions.

The RBDM always listens to the players, though the players are not always aware of what it is the RBDM is hearing.

One example:

That chance encounter with the pot merchant on the road? The players loved the fact that you gave him a little quirk in his personality. You created the encounter with the intention of not having every random encounter be a monster to fight. This random encounter is just an average joe that is trying to make his way in the world. The players decide that the PCs will camp with him and watch out for him for the night. Maybe they even buy a skillet because they need to have something to fry eggs on each morning. The silver or two it cost them meant nothing to their treasure allocation, but it helped him a little bit.

To some DM's this is a blip on the radar. Some DM's might be annoyed that the 'flavor encounter' took so much time that night instead of getting to the dungeon. Some DM's will squander this gem of an opportunity. You see, the players just told you that they found an NPC that they want to care about. They want to see the little guy succeed. This NPC, chance encounter that he started as, is a link to the campaign. Verisimilitude is what we might call it. But the RBDM sees it as something more. This is an opportunity.

Some DM's will see this opportunity and leap upon it. They will pounce and immediately put the hapless NPC in a terrible situation and the PCs are the only people that can help.

That isn't a terrible option. After all, the PCs now care about something and it is good to use this touchstone to create a new adventure hook. But the artful RBDM won't immediately do this.

Instead, the PCs will later encounter the merchant somewhere else. He will be excited to see the PCs. He may share news. Suspicious players will keep waiting for the 'gotcha'. The Merchant is possessed, or lycanthropic, or has a sob story. But is that what the RBDM will use him for? Maybe, but maybe not.

Why not have him just be a merchant that the PCs helped out once and is now happy to see them?

The RBDM will carefully harvest these chance encounters throughout a campaign. The RBDM will retain consistency - the merchant won't show up when the PCs cross the ocean, but he will be a friendly face when they return home weeks, months, or even years later. Throughout a campaign, the RBDM will have several of these NPCs that the PCs care about. Some will be powerful NPCs, some will be weak NPCs, some will be somewhere in between.

When the PCs encounter these NPCs throughout the campaign, many of them will be fine. They will be contacts, they will provide news. But sometimes the DM will use these NPCs for something else. The pot merchant might show up across the sea. But now he is a refugee because the homeland the PCs left is torn asunder in war. Or maybe the merchant is a werewolf and now the PCs need to try to cure him, or just kill him. Or maybe, just maybe, the merchant is cursed with an invisible imp on his shoulder. The silver the PCs paid him with was cursed and over the last few months he has been hounded by this imp. The curse didn't take effect until after the new moon, after the PCs had spent all that silver. Now there are innkeepers, merchants, wenches, and even a sage affected by this curse, scattered across the land. The PCs didn't know they were cursing these people, but they didn't check to see if the silver was cursed did they? Sure, they took the silver from the ghoul that was old man Miser in that town. Who knew that old man Miser's family was cursed? All of his money was buried with him and so it arose with him the day he started feasting on the flesh of those poor town people. The PCs saved the town by killing the ghoul and taking all of his money. But then they cursed the land for leagues around when they started spending that silver. Poor average joe, the pot merchant, was just trying to make a living when the PCs bought that skillet. He didn't know the great heroes would curse him...

But it only works and makes you a RBDM because the players care about the pot merchant, and they care about the campaign world. And they know that if they had checked for magic, or curses, or anything, they could have avoided this whole thing! Now they have a whole slew of people to go help because they were careless and they, of all people, should have known better. It also works because the recurring encounters with average joes aren't always going to turn out bad. The PCs have plenty of NPCs that they have befriended who didn't have anything terrible befall them.

in retrospect, you had a chance encounter that the players liked. You built upon it and the world was consistent. Then, when you needed a new plot hook, you created one that stemmed from their chance encounter and reactions. But to the players, you crafted a delightful twist to a story tha tmight have been months in the making. They feel like they could have stopped it if they had only looked for the curse to begin with. They feel like they need to fix the problem now because they care about the people, and they didn't prevent it from happening in the first place.

Obviously, this requires a lot of paying attention on the part of the RBDM. But with every encounter, every word that drops from the players, you are learning what they like, and what is working in your game. Then you are twisting the stories so they always revolve around the PCs. However, the world itself doesn't revolve around the PCs. There are always other things going on. But that is a different example and a different tactic that the RBDM uses.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top