"Run away! Run away!" ... what if they don't?

[5ekyu]

The big problem that I am seeing here is with DMs who see themselves as storytellers, and the players as puppets who should act out the story the DM has pre-ordained.

That can be a problem or can be fine, depends on who is looking for what and the extreme to which it is taken.

Vast majority of games are played in the grounds between the extremes some folks seem to want to paint other folks into.

 

[Ancalagon]

The big problem that I am seeing here is with DMs who see themselves as storytellers, and the players as puppets who should act out the story the DM has pre-ordained.

I am not sure if this is addressed to me, but I think you need to re-read my OP and think about it.

The players have a choice when faced with this encounter. It's up to them to decide what to do. I'm asking for advice on what happens if they take a different choice than the obvious one; I'm not asking how to "force" them to make the choice I "want" them to make.

 

[Maxperson]

Really? So its fine for players to assume their next characters all know and learned from their previous characters experience - as long as that previous character died???

I am sure that works for some ganes just fine. I have seen plenty of games where stuff like "my character wills my loot to my next character if i die" and alk sorts of things were done and they had fun too, so this knowledge carry over after character death is not that much dufferent.

So, fantastic for those who like that thing.

Not on,my menu of choice tho.

I cannot think of last time i had a character i created be so tied to a previous one or had it requested in my game.

This is what's known as a Strawman. Because, he didn't say the bolded portion at all. Not even a little bit. Altering what he said and then responding to your altered version is a classic Strawman.

What he's saying is that the players have learned(hopefully) not to go rushing headfirst at something clearly beyond them. Maybe the next group doesn't go rushing the dragon at 3rd level, or go rushing the 100 drow raiding party at 5th level.

Not sure what if anything led you to jump from what i said all the way to suicide missions and dont care live or die.

The same thing that led you to state the bolded part in the first post I would imagine.

 

[Imaculata]

The big problem that I am seeing here is with DMs who see themselves as storytellers, and the players as puppets who should act out the story the DM has pre-ordained.

Frankly I think DM's ARE storytellers. But I don't consider my players 'puppets'. I think a DM can (and probably should) have a story in mind, without it immediately being a railroad campaign.


For example, I'm currently preparing a session for my 3.5 pirate campaign that DOES involve a story, a dungeon, various side quests, and a main quest. I plan to spread out various plot hooks over the course of the session, as the players go about their personal goals. My objective is to then intertwine their personal goals, with the plot. And various plot hooks point towards the same story. But depending on their choices, they may come at the story from a different angle, and with a different resolution.

Are the players 'puppets' for following my carefully laid out trail of breadcrumbs? I personally don't think so. But I know what sort of mysteries to hand them to get them to chase the story. I would not be surprised if many, if not most DM's, run their campaign this way.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm just a referee, keeping it fair. And like NBA refs I can be bribed.

 

[iserith]

Frankly I think DM's ARE storytellers. But I don't consider my players 'puppets'. I think a DM can (and probably should) have a story in mind, without it immediately being a railroad campaign.

DMs are storytellers, "the game's lead storyteller" in fact. I don't think it's a great idea to "have a story in mind" though, depending on what is meant by that. I see "the story" as the tale that emerges during play as the DM presents situations, the players do stuff, and the DM narrates results. So I might have an adventure location where goblins and kobolds are warring over territory. But there's no "story" there until the PCs interact with it and some results are produced. What I wouldn't want to do as DM is decide that the characters are going to ally themselves with the kobolds against the goblins because that's "the story" I have a mind to tell as the "lead storyteller." It just means I control two-thirds of the basic conversation of the game and present the situation. "The story" comes later, which may or may not involve the characters allying with the kobolds.

I say this to clarify what "story" means, at least to me, in D&D 5e. It's a word that gets thrown around quite a bit and causes a lot of misunderstandings especially as it relates to the DM's role.

 

[Sacrosanct]

DMs are storytellers, "the game's lead storyteller" in fact. I don't think it's a great idea to "have a story in mind" though, depending on what is meant by that. I see "the story" as the tale that emerges during play as the DM presents situations, the players do stuff, and the DM narrates results. So I might have an adventure location where goblins and kobolds are warring over territory. But there's no "story" there until the PCs interact with it and some results are produced. What I wouldn't want to do as DM is decide that the characters are going to ally themselves with the kobolds against the goblins because that's "the story" I have a mind to tell as the "lead storyteller." It just means I control two-thirds of the basic conversation of the game and present the situation. "The story" comes later, which may or may not involve the characters allying with the kobolds.

I say this to clarify what "story" means, at least to me, in D&D 5e. It's a word that gets thrown around quite a bit and causes a lot of misunderstandings especially as it relates to the DM's role.

Pretty much this. In fact, I'd say the DM is less a storyteller, and more of an actor. An actor for every NPC and monster in the game world. The story is nothing more than a series of reactions from the environment and inhabitants of the game world to the PC actions. And since the DM knows everything in that game world, they are also equal parts referee and will act in those roles with fairness as how they would and should react to said PC actions

For example, all of us familiar with Temple of Elemental Evil know the story: investigate the temple, the cleric blabs of the greater temple, so you investigate that, eventually defeat Zuggtmoy. The DM isn't there to tell that story, but to simply play the role of all those NPCs involved. In one instance where I DM'd this series, the story ended up with the PCs joining the cult and taking over Hommlet as their base of operations, spreading the will of the fungi encrusted monstrosity lol. Being a DM who is trying to stick to a predetermined story can prevent some really great gaming memories, and kind of runs counter to the main benefit of a TTRPG--only limited by your imagination

 

[hawkeyefan]

Hiya!

It depends entirely on if the DM is a "new skool" DM, or an "old skool" one...or how much they lean towards one side or the other.

As an Old Skool DM, I often don't have a "choice" to set things up a certain way for the PC's. Well, at least not if I want my world to be even remotely believable and sustainable over the course of years if not decades. I can't just "decide" that some hills have kobolds when the PC's are level 2, then they have orcs when everyone is level 4, then they have ogres when everyone's level 6, then hill giants when they hit level 10. Then the players decide to make new characters for some reason and head into the hills...and suddenly they're back to 'only' encountering kobolds again.

If the Giant Hills are ventured into...you'll find Hill Giants. I don't care, as a DM, what level the PC's are. My world dictates that "The Giant hills are known for being over-run with ogres, hill giants, cave bears and even a few stone giants. Travelers are to be wary when they risk taking the Stone Road through to the other side"...well then, that's that. Ogres, giants, cave bears will be 'common' in as much as any of them can be. As a DM, my hands are virtually tied. And, IMNSHO, any DM that 'downgrades' or 'upgrades' creatures in some area/adventure to be compatible (re: "balanced") to the players PC's is doing a serious disservice to both his players and himself. But then again...I'm old and crotchety like that!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

No where did I say that the characters should never run into anything beyond them from a combat perspective. In fact, I am all for that idea. However, if they choose to engage such a creature, I think that a TPK is probably too harsh of a punishment. Especially since the DM has directly contributed to what happened.

And for what it’s worth, I think that a TPK is just as much a punishment for the DM as the players in a lot of ways.

I’m not advocating going easy on the PCs or always keeping encounters as level appropriate. I think I’ve been clear on that. I just think people are being a bit overzealous with offering a TPK as a solution to [MENTION=23]Ancalagon[/MENTION]’s problem.

The DM can have the PCs face repurcussions of their bad decisions without the need to resort to a TPK. Especially when the DM contibuted to the situation. Denying the DM’s responsibility because his “habds are tied” is a bit silly. No, they’re really not. The DM can establish if and when and why and how an encounter happens. And with whom.

Again, if the players make foolish decisions like attacking creatures that are too dangerous for them, yes I think they should face the consequences. I just don’t think the consequence needs to be a TPK. There are other less harsh and wasteful ways to handle it.

 

[Sacrosanct]

TPKs are a great solution for a burnt out DM


I kid of course!

 

[hawkeyefan]

The big problem that I am seeing here is with DMs who see themselves as storytellers, and the players as puppets who should act out the story the DM has pre-ordained.

Doesn’t seem like this is the issue to me. Although I do think the DM is a storyteller, I don’t think the players are puppets. I think they’re also storytellers. And their characters likely have stories to tell...ideas they’ve come up with and also ideas presented to them by the DM.

One thing I will say is certainly a railroad is a DM deciding to have a TPK. A TPK absolutely cannot happen without the DM lettintb it happen. Yes the players can do everything wrong and have the characters do incredibly foolish things...but still, a TPK has to have DM approval to happen.

So a DM taking all the stories he and the players may have come up withand having them all end...that’s quite a railroad.