Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay

[MGibster]

I've encountered players that sound a whole lot like this. For whatever reason, there's a certain type of player, that when presented with a figure of authority, cannot help but insult and abuse them. It's related to the Instigator player type - they like to do stuff just to make stuff happen, good or bad. But I think it's also a way at pushing at the boundaries of the game, like trying to find the limit to the map in a videogame. They want to see just how much they can push at the world without it breaking.

This is a particular pet peeve of mine and one I too often encounter. I tend to place characters into the following broad categories.

• Instigators: Players who just like to stir the pot and sow chaos.
• The Anarchist: Players with a pathological dislike of any character in a game with some authority over their PC (it's not like they can tell their boss to go #%%# himself in real life).
• The Unliable: Players who think the role playing aspects don't really matter, believing the plot will plod along as planned regardless of their character's behavior (kind of like how it does in video games).

 

[FrozenNorth]

A lieutenant of the mad ruler even offered to return the weapons to the party and free them from the stockades under the promise that they leave town and never return. He said he would just tell the ruler he had killed them during an escape attempt, because even the lieutenant was tired of all the bloodshed. [And I feel like this was giving in too much as a DM.] Even this compromise was unacceptable to the hot-headed player.

What did the other player think about this? I mean, I would be pretty peeved if I’m about to be executed because I tried to save a player from his own recklessness, and when the chance to escape comes up, he’s like “I would rather die than compromise!”

As for the reckless player, looks like he wants to reroll a new character. He may even want to reroll a character that fits the campaign better.

 

[FrozenNorth]

A DM may do as you suggest, but just watched season 2 of The Last Kingdom actually threatening the king = execution in most cases.

I agree. It breaks immersion when your power mad tyrant acts like a reasonable authority figure.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Yes, I’m all for facing the consequences. I think the best advice about playing that I’ve read in recent years is to play your PC like you’d drive a stolen car. I think that players are generally far too cautious with their characters in play.

Wait, don’t you drive a stolen car super cautiously to avoid being pulled over by the police?

 

[Retreater]

I agree. It breaks immersion when your power mad tyrant acts like a reasonable authority figure.

True. And the mad tyrant would've put them to death. However it was his lieutenant who decided to show mercy to the party and let them escape (before they attacked the guards and threw the offer in his face).

 

[jasper]

Wait, don’t you drive a stolen car super cautiously to avoid being pulled over by the police?

I can't be. Because it hit the siren when I pulled off.

 

[CleverNickName]

I think the OP did everything he could do to set the scene, describe the risks, and foreshadow the consequences. This doesn't sound like it was some kind of "ha ha gotcha, you're dead" trap; the characters fully knew what they were dealing with and what to expect. Instead of heeding the DM's warnings, they decided to call him on it, and that's that. The characters must now face the consequences--the very well-defined, forewarned, and expected consequences--of their action.

Had this happened at my table, I would have broken the fourth wall when the character barked out "you're a terrible leader" or whatever. I would have asked the player if that was truly the action they wanted to take, or if he's just frustrated with the amount of time the scene is taking and needs a break or something. If he insists on the former, I would remind him that the person he is speaking to would have him imprisoned or worse for that offense, and his character is well-aware of this, etc. Essentially give him an "are you sure?" button to click. If he still insists on it, I'd ask one last question: how do you want to deal with the imprisonment and/or death of your character...like, do you want to roll up a new character if this goes poorly?

Yes, it's immersion-breaking. But I feel that pivotal points like this in the story kind of warrant it.

 

[Scott Christian]

That would normally be great advice, and I'd be much better about improvising, but we're playing online with Roll20 and a published adventure. If they go too far off the rails, there's simply nothing there. I could create my own stuff, but it takes a lot of extra time online. And I can't do it at the drop of a hat.

Ah. definitely understand that. The amount of time to do "from scratch" is crazy on Roll20. So without a doubt, redirect, redirect-redirect.

I am glad you guys worked it out. That's nice to hear. Have fun and enjoy!

 

[hawkeyefan]

So, I'm afraid that's not a fully stated point.

Players are far too cautious with their characters... for what?

They are far too cautious... to have fun? ...to meet your personal tastes? ...to justify the time they spend on play?

Unless you complete the thought, we don't actually know what you are saying.

I thought that the context of that statement was pretty clear given the back and forth about reckless behavior and being willing to face consequences in play, and how I was advocating for playing your character like a stolen car. I prefer when players are less cautious in the actions that they declare for their characters.

But to elaborate....typically, RPG characters are in some way bold. They are often literally adventurers or heroes or criminals or some sort of other type of person who would often be bold and daring. They lead risky lives.

But very often they are not played so.

This can be for many reasons, I've found. Primary among them is fear of losing the character to death or some similar fate that takes them away from the player. People get invested in their characters and they get attached, and they don't want to lose them. Related to this is whether the game mechanics support bold action or caution. Players also sometimes fear "going off the rails or some similar disruption of "the story".

So I've found this to be a point of frustration in some games, as both a GM and a player.

 

[Lanefan]

It's now my policy to pause the game whenever a PC decides to do something monumentally stupid that will likely derail the campaign and ask them if they wish to proceed.

'Derailing' assumes it was ever on the rails in the first place...

Also, what to some might appear as a derailing would to others simply be a new wrinkle. Depends how flexible one is as DM.